ULI 





i 


= 


i 




















UHH TH 






































































































































x 

a 
==: 
= St 
Ses 
sacs 
SSS 
S355 
= Se SSS 
SS 
Pica ifm Ngee ey 
SAQaSE 5) 
SASS 
SSS 
wane ae ison 
Set aes 
= SS ASS 
= Sees 
4 eee, ey lee 
SS 
= tt in oops cos 
a FS RAS 
S25 S55 
Ss SNS 
fie ile Re 
SSeS 
S555. 
ARS SS 
= aS 
= ee 
Say 





sig thins 





li! 
bs }egatad) 
‘ if | 
wn 


{ 
TS 
SET TSyperse Tar 


ili 


i 
Yes) 
' 

















= ane om 

a PSS % Ez 
SesS35 ‘i oe 
SRS SS t Fares 
= MAES st = 
= a) WEEE : : pare 
ss; AS Sis. = - 

m3 TSS 3s, me 
= +e 7 ~ =f 
ty eee = ‘y ae | 

rat na mm Say" Cat ee 4A » 


Jay 





Wh 


ptt 


~<a ks ‘e = c i NS eos 


atith 


GHHGH EH 


Lestaed itl 





THE LIBRARY 
OE 
THE UNIVERSITY 
OF CALIFORNIA 
RIVERSIDE 












:ilarchive.org/details/historyofg reece01 grotiala : 


t 











We Und 
se 


BA Sees very 


wet 
hess 





HISTORY OF GREECE. 


I. Legendary Greere. 


I]. Grecian Wistory to the Reigu of 
Privistratus ot Athens. 


BY 


GEORGE GROTE, Esa. . 
Ny 


VOL. I. 


REPRINTED FROM THE SECOND LONDON EDITION 


NEW YORK: 
HARPER & BROTHERS, PUBLISHERS, 


329 AND 331 PEARL STREET. 


1880. 


PART L— LEGENDARY GREECE 


*Avdpdv jpduv Seiov yévoc, of kahéovtat 
‘Huideot rporépy yevén. — Hesiop 


PART Il.— HISTORICAL GREECE. 
« eesllodses pepérov avdporav. — Homes 


‘PREFACE. 


THE first idea sf this History was conceived many years 
ago, at a time whin ancient Hellas was known to the English 
public chiefly through the pages of Mitford; and my purpose 
in writing it was t) rectify the erroneous statements as to 
matter of fact which that History contained, as well as to pre- 
sent the general pheaomena of the Grecian world under what 
I thought a juster an 1 more comprehensive point of view. My 
leisure, however, was not at that time equal to the execution 
of any large literary undertaking ; nor is it until within the 
last three or four years that I have been able to devote to the 
work that continuous and exclusive labor, without which, 
though much may be done to illustrate detached points, no 
entire or complicated subject can ever be set forth in a man 
ner worthy to meet the public eye. 

Meanwhile the state of the English literary world, in ref- 
erence to ancient Hellas, has been materially changed in 
more ways than one. If my early friend Dr. Thirlwall’s 
History of Greece had appeared a few years sooner, I should 
probably never have conceived the design of the present 
work at all; I should certainly not have been prompted to the 
task by any deficiencies, such as those which I felt and regret- 
ted in Mitford. The comparison of the two authors affords, 
indeed, a striking proof of the progress of sund and enlarged 


iv PREFACE. 


views respecting the ancient world during the present gener 
ation. Having studied of course the same evidences as Dr 
Thirwall, I am better enabled than others to bear testimony 
to the learning, the sagacity, and the candor which pervade 
his excellent work: and it is the more incumbent on me to 
give expression to this sentiment, since the particular points 
on which I shall have occasion to advert to it will, unavoidably, 
be points of dissent oftener than of coincidence. 

The liberal spirit of criticism, in which Dr. Thirwall stands 
so much distinguished from Mitford, is his own: there are 
other features of superiority which belong to him conjointly 
with hisage. For during the generation since Mitford’s work, 
philological studies have been prosecuted in Germany with 
remarkable success: the stock of facts and documents, com- 
paratively scanty, handed down from the ancient world, 
has been combined and illustrated in a thousand different 
ways: and if our witnesses cannot be multiplied, we at least 
have numerous interpreters to catch, repeat, amplify, and ex- 
plain their broken and halfinaudible depositions. Some of 
the best writers in this department— Boeckh, Niebuhr, 
©. Miller —have been translated into our language ; so that 
the English public has been enabled to form some idea of the 
new lights thrown upon many subjects of antiquity by the in- 
estimable aid of German erudition. The poets, historians, 
orators, and philosophers of Greece, have thus been all ren- 
dered both more intelligible and more instructive than they 
were to a student in the last century; and the general pic- 
ture of the Grecian world may now be conceived with a de- 
gree of fidelity, which, considering our imperfect materials, it 
is curious to contemplate. 

It is that general picture which an historian of Greeee is 
required first to embody in his own mind, and next to lay out 
before his readers ; — a picture not merely such as to delight 
the imagination by brilliancy of coloring and depth of senti- 
nent, but also suggestive and improving to the reason Net 


PREFACE. x 
omitting the points of resemblance as well as of contrast with 
the better-known forms of modern society, he will especially 
study to exhikit the spontaneous movement of Grecian intcl- 
lect, sometimes aided but never borrowed from without, and 
lighting up a small portion of a world otherwise clouded and 
stationary. He will develop the action of that social system, 
which, while insuring to the mass of freemen a degree of pro 
tection elsewhere unknown, acted as a stimulus to the crea 
tive impulses of genius, and left the superior minds sufficiently 
unshackled to soar above religious and political routine, to 
overshoot their own age, and to become the teachers of pos 
terity. 

To set forth the history of a people by whom the first spark 
was set to the dormant intellectual capacities of our nature,— 
Hellenic phenomena, as illustrative of the Hellenic mind and 
character,— is the task which I propose to myself in the 
present work ; not without a painful consciousness how much 
the deed falls short of the will, and a yet more painful con- 
‘viction, that full success is rendered impossible by an obstacle 
which no human ability can now remedy,— the insufficiency 
of original evidence. For, inspite of the valuable expositions 
of so many able commentators, our stock of information re 
specting the ancient world still remains lamentably inadequate 
to the demands of an enlightened curiosity. We possess only 
what has drifted ashore from the wreck of a stranded vessel ; 
and though this includes some of the most precious articles 
amongst its once abundant cargo, yet if any man will cast his 
eyes over the citations in Diogenes Laértius, Athenzus, or 
Plutarch, or the list of names in Vossius de Historicis Gree- 
cis, he will see with grief and surprise how much larger is 
the proportion which, through the enslavement of the Greeks 
themselves, the decline of the Roman Empire, the change of 
religion, and the irruption of barbarian conquerors, has been 
irrecoverably submerged. We are thus reduced to judge of 
ihe whole Hellenic world, eminently multiform as it was, 


vs PREFACE. 


from a few compositions ; excellent, indeed, in themselves, but 
bearing too exclusively the stamp of Athens. Of Thucydides 
and Aristotle, indeed, both as inquirers into matter of fact, 
and as free from narrow local feeling, it is impossible to speak 
too highly ; but, unfortunately, that work of the latter which 
would have given us the most copious information regarding 
Grecian political life — his collection and comparison of one 
hundred and fifty,distinct town constitutions — has not been 
preserved : and the brevity of Thucydides often gives us but a 
single word where a sentence would not have been too much, 
and sentences which we should be glad tosee expanded into 
paragraphs. 

Such insufficiency of original and trustworthy materials, ag 
compared with those resources which are thought hardly suf- 
ficient for the historian of any modern kingdom, is neither ta 
be concealed nor extenuated, however much we may lament 
it. I advert to the point here on more. grounds than one. 
For it not only limits the amount of information which: an 
historian of Greece can give to his readers,— compelling him 
to leave much of his picture an absolute blank,— but it also 
greatly spoils the execution of the remainder. ‘The question 
of credibility is perpetually obtruding itself, and requiring a 
decision, which, whether favorable or unfavorable, always in- 
troduces more or less of controversy ; and gives to those out 
lines, which the interest of the picture requires to be straight 
and vigorous, a faint and faltering character. Expressions 
of qualified and hesitating affirmation are repeated until the 
reader ig sickened; while the writer- himself, to whom this 
restraint is more painful still, is frequently tempted to break 
loose from the unseen spell by which a conscientious criticism 
binds him down, — to screw up the possible and probable 
into certainty, to suppress counterbalancing considerations, 
and to substitute a pleasing romance in place of half- 
known and perplexing realities. Desiring, in the present 
work, to set forth all which can be ascertained, together with 


PREFACE. vil 


such conjectures and inferencés as can be reasonably deduced 
from it, but nothing more,—l notice, at the outset, that faulty 
state of the original evidence which renders discussions of 
credibility, and hesitation in the language of the judge, una- 
voidable. Such discussions, though the reader may be as- 
sured that they will become less frequent as we advance into 
times better known, are tiresome enough, even with the com- 
paratively late period which I adopt as the historical begin- 
ning; much more intolerable would they have proved, had I 
thought it my duty to start from the primitive terminus of 
Deukalion or Inachus, or from the unburied Pelasgi and 
Leleges, and to subject the heroic ages to a similar scrutiny. 
[ really know nothing so disheartening or unrequited as the 
elaborate balancing of what is called evidence,— the compar- 
ison of infinitesimal probabilities and conjectures all uncerti- 
fied,— in regard to these shadowy times and persons. 

The law respecting sufficiency of evidence ought to be the 
same for ancient times as for modern; and the reader will 
find in this History an application, to the former, of criteria 
analogous to those which have been long recognized in the 
latter. Approaching, though with a certain measure of 
indulgence, to this standard, I begin the real history of 
Greece with the first recorded Olympiad, or 776 B.c. To 
such as are accustomed to the habits once universal, and still 
not uncommon, in investigating the ancient world, I may ap- 
pear to be striking off one thousand years from the scroll of 
history ; but to those whose canon of evidence is derived 
from Mr. Hallam, M. Sismondi, or any other eminent histo- 
rian of modern events, I am well assured that I shall appear 
lax and credulous rather than exigent or sceptical. For 
the truth is, that historical records, properly so called, do not 
begin until long after this date: nor will any man, who can- 
didly considers the extreme paucity of attested facts for twe 
centuries after 776 B. c., be astonished to learn that the state 
of Greece in 900, 1000, 1100, 1200, 1300, 1400 B. «., etm, 


viii PREFACE. 


-—or any ealier century which it may please chronologists te 
inciude in their computed genealogies,— cannot be described 
to him upon anything like decent evidence. I shall hope, 
when I come to the lives of Socrates and Plato, to illustrate 
one of the most valuable of their principles,— that conscious 
und confessed ignorance is a better state of mind, than the 
tancy, without the reality, of knowledge. Meanwhile, I begin 
by making that confession, in reference to the real world of 
Greece anterior to the Olympiads; meaning the disclaimer 
to apply to anything like a general history,—not to exclude 
rigorously every individual event. 

The times which I thus set apart from the region of his 
tory are discernible only through a different atmosphere, — 
that of epic poetry and legend. ‘To confound together these 
disparate matters is, in my judgment, essentially unphilo- 
sophical. I deseribe the earlier times by themselves, as con- 
ceived by the faith and feeling of the first Greeks, and known 
only through their legends, —without presuming to measure 
how much or how little of historical matter these legends may 
contain. If the reader blame me for not assisting him to de- 
termine this, —if he ask me why I do not undraw the curtaia 
and disclose the picture, —I reply in the words of the painter 
Zeuxis, when the same question was addressed to him on ex- 
hibiting his master-piece of imitative art: ‘“ The curtain es 
the picture.” What we now read as poetry and legend was 
once accredited history, and the only genuine history which 
the first Greeks could conceive or relish of their past time: the 
curtain conceals nothing behind, and cannot, by any ingenuity, 
be withdrawn. I undertake only to show it as it stands, — 
not to efface, still less to repaint it. 

Three-fourths of the two volumes now presented to the 
public are destined to elucidate this age of historical faith, 
as distinguished from. the later age of historical reason: to 
exhibit its basis in the human mind,— an omnipresent religious 
and personal interpretation of nature ; to illustrate it by com 


PREFACE. ix 


parison with the like mental habit in early modern Europe , 
to show its immense abundance and variety of narrative 
matter, with little care for consistency between one story 
and another ; lastly, to set forth the causes which overgrew 
and partially supplanted the old epical sentiment, and intro- 
duced, in the room of literal faith, a variety o compromises 
and interpretations. 

The legendary age of the Greeks receives its principal 
charm and dignity from the Homeric poems: to these, there- 
bre, and to the other poems included in the ancient ons an 
entire chapter is devoted, the length of which must be justi- 
fied by the names of the Iliad and Odyssey. I have thought 
it my duty to take some notice of the Wolfian controversy as 
it now stands in Germany, and have even hazarded some 
speculations respecting the structure of the Iliad. The so 
ciety and manners of the heroic age, considered as known in 
a general way from Homer’s descriptions and allusions, are 
also described and criticized. 

I next pass to the historical age, beginning at 776 B.¢. ; 
prefixing some remarks upon the geographical features of 
Greece. I try to make out, amidst obscure and scanty indi- 
eations, what the state of Greece was at this period; and I 
indulge some cautious conjectures, founded upon the earliest 
verifiable facts, respecting the steps immediately antecedent 
by which that condition was brought about. In the present 
volumes, I have only been able to include the history of Sparta 
and the Peloponnesian Dorians, down to the age of Peisis- 
tratus and Croesus. I had hoped to have comprised in 
them the entire history of Greece down to this last-mentioned 
period, but I find the space insufficient. 

The history of Greece falls most naturally into six com- 
partments, of which the first may be looked at as a period of 
preparation for the five following, which exhaust the free life 
of collective Hellas. 

I. Period from 776 B. c. to 560 B. c., the accession of 
Peisistratus at Athens and of Croesus in Latin 

A*® 


= PREFACE. 


II. From the accession of Peisistratus and Croesus to tha 
repulse of Xerxes from Greece. 

III. From the repulse of Xerxes to the close of the ir 
ponnesian war and overthrow of Athens. 

IV. From the close of = Peloponnesian war to the bat- 
tle of Leuktra. 

VY. From the battle of Tekan to that of Cheeroneia. 

VI. From the battle of Cheeroneia to the end of the gen- 
eration of Alexander. 

The five periods, from Peisistratus down to the death of 
Alexander and of his generation, present the acts of an his- 

torical drama capable of being recounted in perspicuous sue- 
cession, and connected by a sensible thread of unity. I shall 
interweave in their proper places the important but outlying 
adventures of the Sicilian and Italian Greeks, — introducing 
such occasional notices of Grecian political constitutions, phi- 
losophy, poetry, and oratory, as are requisite to exhibit the 
many-sided activity of this people during their short but 
brilliant career. 

After the generation of Alexander, the political action of 
Greece becomes cramped and degraded, — no longer interest- 
ing to the reader, or operative on the destinies of the future 
world. We may, indeed, name one or two incidents, especially 
the revolutions of Agis and Kleomenés at Sparta, which are 
both instructive and affecting; but as a whole, the period, 
between 300 3B. c. and the absorption of Greece by the Ro- 
mans, is of no interest in itself, and is only so far of value 
as it helps us to understand the preceding centuries. Tho 
dignity and value of the Greeks from that time forward be 
long to them only as individual philosophers, preceptors, as- 
tronomers, and mathematicians, literary men and critics, med 
ical practioners, ete. In all these respective capacities, 
especially in the great schools of philosophical speculation 
they still constitute the light of the Roman world; though, 
as communities, they have lost their own orbit, and have be 
.ctne satellites of more powerful neighbors. 


PREFACE. zi 


I propose to bring down the history of the Grecian com- 
munities to the year 300 B. c., or the close of the generation 
which takes its name from Alexander the Great, and I hope 
to accomplish this in eight volumes altogether. or the next 
two or three volumes [ have already large preparations 
made, and I shall publish my third (perhaps my fourth) in 
the course of the ensuing winter. 

There are great disadvantages in the publication of one 
pertion of a history apart from the remainder ; for neither the 
earlier nor the later phenomena can be fully comprehended 
without the light which each mutually casts upon the other. 
But the practice has become habitual, and is indeed more 
than justified by the well-known inadmissibility of “ long 
hopes” into the short span of human life. Yet I cannot but 
fear that my first two volumes will suffer in the estimation of 
many readers by coming out alone, — and that men who value 
the Greeks for their philosophy, their politics, and their ora- 
tory, may treat the early legends as not worth attention. 
And it must be confessed that the sentimental attributes of 
the Greek mind— its religious and poetical vein —here ap- 
pear in disproportionate relief, as compared with its more 
vigorous and masculine capacities, — with those powers of 
acting, organizing, judging, and speculating, which will be re- 
vealed in the forthcoming volumes. I venture, however, to 
forewarn the reader, that there will occur numerous circum- 
stances in the after political life of the Greeks, which he will 
not comprehend unless he be initiated into the course of their 
legendary associations. He will not understand the frantic 
terror of the Athenian public during the Peloponnesian war, 
on the occasion of the mutilation of the statues called Her- 
mz, unless he enters into the way in which they connected 
their stability and security with the domiciliation of the gods 
in the soil: nor will he adequately appreciate the habit of 
the Spartan king on military expeditions, — when he offered 
his daily public sacrifices on behalf of his army and his coun 


xii PREFACE. 


try, — “always to perform this morning service immediately 
before sunrise, in order that he might be beforehand in ob- 
taining the favor of the gods,’’! if he be not familiar with the 
Homeric conception of Zeus going to rest at night and 
awaking to rise at early dawn from the side of the ‘‘ white- 
armed Héré.”” ‘The occasion will, indeed, often occur for 
remarking how these legends illustrate and vivify the politi 
cal phenomena of the succeeding times, and I have only now 
to urge the necessity of considering them as the beginning of 
@ series, —not as an entire work. 





1 Xenophon, Repub. Lacedzmon. cap. xiii. 3. ’Ac? 63, brav Sintra, dpye 
Tat pév Tobrov Tov épyov Ett KvEedaioc, TI0AaUBaveELy BovAduevog THy Tod Bees 
evvocav. 


Lonpos, March 5 1846. 


PREFACE: TO THE SECOND EDITION OF 
VOLUMES I. AND I. 





In preparing a Second Edition of the first two volumes 
of my History, I have profited by the remarks and correc- 
tions of various critics, contained in Reviews, both English 
and foreign. I have suppressed, or rectified, some positions 
which had been pointed out as erroneous, or as advanced 
upon inadequate evidence. I have strengthened my argu- 
ment in some cases where it appeared to have been imper- 
fectly understood, —adding some new notes, partly for the 
purpose of enlarged illustration, partly to defend certain 
opinions which had been called in question. The greater 
number of these alterations have been made in Chapters 
XVI. and XXI. of Part I., and in Chapter VI. of Part IT. 

I trust that these three Chapters, more full of speculation, 
and therefore more open to criticism than any of the others, 
will thus appear in a more complete and satisfactory form. 
But I must at the same time add that they remain for the 
most part unchanged in substance, and that I have seen no 
sufficient reason to modify my main conclusions even respect- 
ing the structure of the Iliad, controverted though they have 
been by some of my most esteemed critics. 

In regard to the character and peculiarity of Grecian le 
gend, as broadly distinguished throughout these volumes from 
Grecian .history, I desire to notice two valuable publications 


xiv PREFACE. 


with which I have only become acquainted since the date of 
my firstedition. One of these is, A Short Essay on Prime- 
val History, by John Kenrick, M. A. (London, 1846, publish- 
ed just at the same time as these volumes,) which illustrates 
with much acute reflection the general features of legend, 
not only in Greece but throughout the ancient world, — see 
especially pages 65, 84, 92, et seg. The other work is, 
Rambles and Recollections of an Indian Official, by Colonel 
Sleeman, — first made known to me through an excellent no- 
tice of my History in the Edinburgh Review for October 1846. 
The description given by Colonel Sleeman, of the state of 
mind now actually prevalent among the native population of 
Hindostan, presents a vivid comparison, helping the modern 
reader to understand and appreciate the legendary era of 
Greece. I have embodied in the notes of this Second Edi- 
tion two or three passages from Colonel Sleeman’s instruc- 
tive work: but the whole of it richly deserves perusal. 

Having now finished six volumes of this History, without 
attaining a lower point than the peace of Nikias, in the tenth 
year of the Peloponnesian war, — TI find myself compelled to 
retract the expectation held out in the preface to my First 
Edition, that the entire work might be completed in eight 
volumes. Experience proves to me how impossible it is to 
measure beforehand the space which historical subjects will 
require. All I can now promise is, that the remainder of the 
work shall be executed with as much regard to brevity as is 
consistent with the paramount duty of rendering it ft for 
public acceptance. 


London, April 3, 1849 


NAMES OF GODS, GODDESSES, AND HEROES. 





Fotiowine the example of Dr. Thirlwall and other excellent 
scholars, I call the Greek deities by their real Greek names, and 
not by the Latin equivalents used among the Romans. For the 
assistance of those readers to whom the Greek names may be less 
familiar, I here annex a table of the one and the other. 


Greek. Latin. 
Zeus, Jupiter. 
Poseidon, Neptune. 
Arés, Mars. 
Dionysus, Bacchus. 
Hermés, Mercury. 
Hélios, Sol. 
Héphestus, Vulcan. 
Hadés, Pluto. 
Héré, Juno. 
Athéné, Minerva. 
Artemis, Diana. 
Aphrodité, Venus. 
Eés, Aurora. 
Hestia, Vesta. 
Lété, Latona. 
Démétér, Ceres. 
Héraklés, Hercules. 
Asklépius, Z&sculapius. 


A few words are here necessary respecting the orthography 
ot Greek names adopted in the above table and generally through- 
out this history. I have approximated as nearly as I dared to 
the Greek letters in preference to the Latin ; and on this point I 
venture upon an innovation which I should have little doubt of 
vindicating before the reason of any candid English student. For 
the ordinary practice of substituting, ina Greek name, the Englisk 
C in place of the Greek K, is, indeed, so obviously incorrect, that 


xvi 


it admits of 110 rational justification. Our own K, precisely and 
in every point, coincides with the Greek K: we have thus the 
means of reproducing the Greek name to the eye as well as to 
the ear, yet we gratuitously take the wrong letter in preference 
to the right. And the precedent of the Latins is here against us 
rather than in our favor, for their C really coincided in sound 
with the Greek K, whereas our C entirely departs from it, and 
becomes an §, before e, 7, @, @, and y. ‘Though our C has so far 
deviated in sound from the Latin C, yet there is some warrant 
for our continuing to use it in writing Latin names, — because we 
thus reproduce the name to the eye, though not to the ear. But 
this is not the case when we employ our C to designate the Greek 
K, for we depart here not less from the visible than from the audi- 
ble original; while we mar the unrivalled euphony of the Greek 
language by that multiplied sibilation which constitutes the least 
inviting feature in our own. Among German philologists, the K 
is now universally employed in writing Greek names, and I have 
adopted it pretty largely in this work, making exception for such 
names as the English reader has been so accustomed to hear with 
the C, that they may be considered as being almost Anglicised. 
I have, farther, marked the long e and the long o (y, w,) by a 
circumflex (Héré) when they occur in the last syllable or in the 
penultimate of a name. 


CONTENTS 


VOL. L 





PART I. 


LEGENDARY GREECE. 





CHAPTER I. 
LEGENDS RESPECTING THE GODS. 


Opening of the mythical world.— How the mythes are to be told. — Alle 
gory rarely admissible. — Zeus — foremost in Grecian conception. — The 
—how conceived: human type enlarged.— Past history of the gods 

tted on to present conceptions. — Chaos. — Gea and Uranos.— Uranos 
disabled. — Kronos and the Titans. — Kronos overreached. — Birth and 
safety of Zeus and his brethren. — Other deities. — Ambitious schemes of 
Zeus. — Victory of Zeus and his brethren over Kronos and the Titans. — 
Typhéeus. — Dynasty of Zeus. — His offspring. — General distribution of 
the divine race. — Hesiodic theogony —its authority. — Points of differ- 
ence between Homer and Hesiod. — Homeric Zeus. — Amplified theogony 
of Zeus.— Hesiodic mythes traceable to Kréte and Delphi.— Orphic 
theogony.— Zeus and Phanés.— Zagreus. — Comparison of Hesiod and 
Orpheus.— Influence of foreign religions upon Greece — Especially 
in regard to the worship of Démétér and Dionysos. — Purification for 
homicide unknown to Homer. —New and peculiar religious rites. — Cir- 
culated by voluntary teachers and promising special blessings. — Epime- 
nidés, Sibylla, Bakis. — Principal mysteries of Greece. — Ecstatic rites 
introduced from Asia 700-500 8. c.— Connected with the worship of 
Dionysos. — Thracian and Egyptian influence upon Greece. — Encour- 
agement to mystic legends. — Melampus the earliest name as teacher of 
the Dionysiac rites. — Orphic sect, a variety of the Diouyaas mystics. — 
Contrast of the mysteries with the Homeric Hymns.— Hymn to Diony- 
sos. — Alteration of the primitive Grecian idea of Dionysos. — Asiatic 
frenzy grafted on the joviality of the Grecian Dionysia. — Eleusinian mys- 
teries. — Homeric Hymn to Démétér. — Temple of Eleusis, built by order 
of Démétér for her residence. — Démétér prescribes the mystic ritual of 
Eleusis.— Homeric Hymn a sacred Eleusinian record, explanatory of the 
details of divine sérvice.— Importance of the mysteries to the town of 
Eleusis. — Strong hold of the legend upon Eleusinian feelings.— Differ- 


xVill CONTENTS. 


ent legends respecting T émétér elsewhere. — Expansion of the legends. — 
Hellenic importance of Démétér.— Legends of Apollo. — Delian Apollo. 
— Pythian Apollo. — Foundation legends of the Delphian oracle. — The 

served the purpose of historical explanation.— Extended worship o: 

Apollo.— Multifarious local. legends respecting Apollo.— Festivals and 
Agénes. — State of mind and circumstances out of which Grecian mythes 
arose. — Discrepancies in the legends little noticed. — Aphrodité. — Athéné, 
— Artemis. — Poseidén.— Stories of temporary servitude imposed on 
gods. — Héré. — Héphestos. — Hestia. — Hermés. — Hermés inventor of 
the lyre.— Bargain between Hermés and Apollo. — Expository value of 
the Hymn. — Zeus. — Mythes arising out of the religious ceremonies. — 
Small part of the animal sacrificed. — Prométheus had outwitted Zeus. — 
Gods, heroes, and men, appear together in the mythes........ pages 1-64 


CHAPTER Il. 
LEGENDS RELATING TO HEROES AND MEN. 


Races of men as they appear in the Hesiodic “ Works and Days.” — The 
Golden.— The Silver.—The Brazen. — The Heroic.—The Iron.— 
Different both from the Theogony and from Homer. — Explanation of 
this difference. — Ethical vein of sentiment.— Intersected by the myth- 
ical. — The “ Works and Days,” earliest didactic poem. — First Introdue- 
tion of dxemons.—Changes in the idea of demons.— Employed in 
attacks on the pagan faith.— Functions of the Hesiodic demons. — Per- 
sonal feeling which pervades the “ Works and Days.” — Probable age of 
the poem .....+46. 60d oe Chae 5 ee eww nue’ ovenwinse'eie ee ealey + 64-73 


CHAPTER III. 
LEGEND OF THE IAPETIDS. 


Iapetids in Hesiod. — Prométheus and Epimétheus. — Counter-manceuvring 
of Prométheus and Zeus. — Pandéra.— Pandéra in the Theogony.— 
General feeling of the poet.— Man wretched, but Zeus not to blame.— 
Mischiefs arising from women.—Punishment of Prométheus.— The 
Prométheus of Aschylus.— Locality in which Prométheus was con- 
ANON Se os Siig Pe aie Lee O le wide Bilealiials oles o(dac win 73-80 


CHAPTER IV. 
HEROIC LEGENDS. —GENEALOGY OF ARGUB. 


Structure and purposes of Grecian genealogies. — To connect the Grecian 
community with their common god. — Lower members of the genealogy 
historical — higher members non-historical.— The non-historical portion 
equally believed, and most valued by the Greeks. — Number of such gen- 
ealogies — pervading every fraction of Greeks. — Argeian rs — 
Inachus.— Phordneus. — Argos Panoptés. —16.— Romance of 10 his- 
thoricized by Persians and Pheenicians. — Legendary abductions of hero- 
ines adapted to the feelings prevalent during the Persian war.— Danaos 
and the Danaides.— Acrisios and Proetos. — The Preetides cured of frenzy 


CONTENTS. xin 


by Melampus. — Acrisios, Danaé, and Zeus. — Perseus and the Gorgens. 
— Foundation of Mycénze — commencement of Perseid dynasty. — Ani- 
phitryén, Alkméné, Sthenelos. — Zeus and Alkméné. — Birth of Héraklés 
— Homeric legend of his birth: its expository value. —~ The Hérakleida 
expelled. — Their recovery of Peloponnésns and establishment in Argos, 
BORCRR MIA TOCERCIND co a5 slurs 8ioMas papas thee ere s.csscvae es 80-95 


CHAPTER V. 
DEUKALION, HELLEN, AND SONS OF HELLEN. 


Deukalion, son of Prométheus. — Phthidtis: his permanent seat. — General 
deluge. — Salvation of Deukalién and Pyrrha.— Belief in this deluge 
throughout Greece. — Hellén and Amphiktyén,— Sons of Hellén: Dérus, 
Xuthus, Aolus.— Amphiktyonic assembly. — Common solemnities and 
games. — Division of Hellas: A®olians, Dorians, Iénians.— Large extent 
of Déris implied in this genealogy. — This form of the legend harmonizes 
with the great establishments of the historical Dérians.— Achzus — 
purpose which his name serves in the legend.— Genealogical diversi- 
ties .. ee or 96-105 


CHAPTER VI. 
THE XOLIDS, OR SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF ZOLUS. 


Legends of Greece, originally isolated, afterwards thrown into series. — AZo- 
lus. — His seven sons and fivé daughters. —1. First olid line — Salmé- 
neus, Tyré. —Pelias and Néleus.— Pér6, Bias, and Melampus. — Peri 
klymenos.— Nestor and his exploits. —Néleids down to Kodrus.— 
Second Aolid line — Krétheus. — Admétus and Alcéstis. — Péleus and the 
wife of Acastus. —Pelias and Jasén.—Jasén and Médea.— Médea at 
Corinth.— Third £olid line —Sisyphus.— Corinthian genealogy of 
Eumélus. — Coalescence of different legends about Médea and Sisyphus. 
— Bellerophén. — Fourth olid line —Athamas.—Phryxus and Hellé. 
—Iné and Palemén—Isthmian games.— Local root of the legend of 
Athamas.— Traces of ancient human sacrifices. - Athamas in the dis- 
trict near Orchomenos. — Eteoklés — festival of the Charitésia. — Found- 
ation and greatness of Orchomenos.— Overthrow by Héraklés and the 
Thebans. — Trophénius and Agamédés.—- Ascalaphos and Ialmenos. — 
Diserepancies in the Orchomenian genealogy.— Probable inferences as 
to the ante-historical Orchomenos. —Its early wealth and industry. — 
Emissaries of the lake Képais. — Old Amphiktyony at Kalauria. — Orcho- 
menos and Thebés.— Alcyoné and Kéyx.— Canacé.— The Aldids.— 
Calycé. — Elis and ZEtélia. — Eleian genealogy. — Augeas. — The Molio- 
nid brothers. — Variations in the Eleian genealogy. — tolian genealogy. 
— Géneus, Meleager, Tydeus.— Legend of Meleager in Homer. — How 
altered by the poets + Homer. — Althea and the burning brand. — 
Grand Kalydénian boar-hunt. — Atalanta. — Relics of the boar long pre: 
served at Tegea.— Atalanta vanquished in the race by stratagem.— 
Deiancira. — Death of Héraklés. — Tydeus.— Old age of CEneus. — Dis- 
crepant gencalogies..... +...++. Sevcenescerecenerceses sos 1OGeLSS 


x CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER VII. 
THE PELOPIDS. 


Misfortunes and celebrity of the Pelopids. — Pelops — eponym of Pelo 
nésus. — Deduction of the sceptre of Pelops. — Kingly attributes of the 
family. — Homeric Pelops. — Lydia, Pisa, cte., post-Homeric additions. 
— Tantalus. — Niobé.— Pelops and Cinomaus, king of Pisa. — Chariot 
victory of Pelops—his principality at Pisa. — Atreus, Thyestés, Chry- 
sippus. — Family horrors among the Pelopids. — Agamemndon and Mene- 
laus. — Orestés. — The goddess Héré and Mykénx. — Legendary impor- 
tance of Mykénz.— Its decline coincident with the rise of Argos and 
Sparta. — Agamemnon and Orestés transferred to Sparta...... 153-167 


CHAPTER VIII. 
LACONIAN AND MESSENIAN GENEALOGIES. 


Lelex — autochthonous in Laconia.— Tindareus and Léda. — Offspring of 
Leda.—1. Castor, Timandra, Klyteemnéstra, 2. Pollux, Helen. —- Castér 
and Pollux.— Legend of the Attic Dekeleia.—Iaas and Lynkeus.— 
Great functions and power of the Dioscuri.— Messénian genealogy. — 
Periéres— Idas and Marpéssa........ccecccssveveceveecvacs 168-173 


CHAPTER IX. 
ARCADIAN GENEALOGY, 


Pelasgus. — Lykadn and his fifty sons.— Legend of Lykaén— ferocity 
punished by the gods.— Deep religious faith of Pausanias.— His view 
of past and present world.— Kallist6 and Arcas.— Azan, Apheidas, 
Elatus.— Aleus, Augé, Telephus. — Ancseus. — Echemus.— Echemus 
kills Hyllus.— Hérakleids repelled from Peloponnésus.— Cordnis and 
Asklépius. — Extended worship of Asklépius —numerous legends. — 
Machaén and Podaleirius. — Numerous Asklépiads, or descendants from 
Asklépius. — Temples of Asklépius —sick persons healed there. . 173-183 


CHAPTER X 
ZZAKUS AND HIS DESCENDANTS. — MGINA, SALAMIS, AND PHTHIA. 


@akus—son of Zeus and Agina.— Offspring of AZakus —Péleus, Tela 
mon, Phékus. — Prayers of AZakus — procure relief for Greece — Phokus 
killed by Péleus and Telamén. — Telamén, banished, goes to Salamis. — 
Péleus — goes to Phthia—his marriage with Thetis. — Neoptolemus. — 
Ajax, his son Philzus the eponymous hero of a déme in Attica. — Teukrus 
banished, settles in Cyprus. — Diffusion of the Macid genealogy 184-190 


CHAPTER XI. 
ATTIC LEGENDS AND GENEALOGIES. 


Erechtheus — autochthonous. — Attic legends — originally from differens 
roots —each déme had its own. — Little noticed by the old epic poets. — 
Kekrops. — Kranaus — Pandién.— Daughters of Pandién — Procné, Phi 


CONTENTS. sais 


loméla. — Legend of Téreus. — Daughters of Erechtheus — Prokris. — 
Kreiisa. — Oreithyia, the wife of Boreas. — Prayers of the Athenians to 
Boreas — his gracious help in their danger. —Erechtheus and Eumolpus. 
— Voluntary self-sacrifice of the three daughters of Erechtheus.— Kre- 
usa and I6n.-— Sons of Pandién — Ageus, etc. — Théseus. — His legend- 
ary character refined. — Plutarch —his way of handling the matter of 
legend. — Legend of the Amazons.—TIts antiquity and prevalence. — 
Glorious achievements of the Amazons.— Their ubiquity. — Universally 
received as a portion of the Greek past.— Amazons produced as present 
by the historians of Alexander. — Conflict of faith and reason in the his- 
IRE CYNIC ag UO lawisa S's pais Selassie ws'e Rigs elv.erdasiel” aie Kavete - 191-217 


CHAPTER XII. 
KRETAN LEGENDS. —MINOS AND HIS FAMILY. 


Minds and Rhadamanthus, sons of Zeus. — Europé. — Pasiphaé and_ the 
Minétaur. — Scylla and Nisus.— Death of Androgeos, and anger of Minés 
against Athens. — Athenian victims for the Minétaur. — Self-devotion of 
Théseus — he kills the Minétaur. — Athenian commemorative ceremonies. 
—Family of Minés.— Minds and Dedalus—flight of the latter to 
Sicily. — Minds goes to retake him, but is killed. — Semi-Krétan settle- 
ments elsewhere — connected with this voyage of Minés. — Sufferings of 
the Krétans afterwards from the wrath of Minds. — Portrait of Minds — 
how varied. — Affinity between Kréte and Asia Minor........ + 218-236 


CHAPTER XIII. 
ARGONAUTIC EXPEDITION. 


Ship Argé in the Odyssey. —In Hesiod and Eumélus.—Jas6n and his 
heroic companions. — Lémnus.— Adventures at Kyzikus, in Bithynia, 
etc. — Héraklés and Hylas. — Phineus. — Dangers of the Symplégades. — 
Arrival at Kolchis. — Conditions imposed by /Hétés as the price of the 
golden fleece. — Perfidy of Aétés — flight of the Argonauts and Médea 
with the fleece. — Pursuit of Aétés — the Argonauts saved by Médea. — 
Return of the Argonauts — circuitous and perilous.— Numerous and 
wide-spread monuments referring to the voyage.— Argonautic legend 
generally. — Fabulous geography — gradually modified as real geograph- 
ical knowledge increased.— Transposition of epical localities. —How 
and when the Argonautic voyage became attached to Kolchis. — Métés 
and Circe. — Return of the Argonauts — different versions. — Continued 
faith in the voyage — basis of truth determined by Strabo...... 231-256 


CHAPTER XIV. 


LEGENDS OF THEBES. 


family. —'The Sphinx. — Eteoklés and Polynikés.— Old epic poems on 
the sieges of Thébes .......... Sebanees (ieee cae eee oo ae enee 


xxii SONTENTS. 


SIEGES OF THEBES. 


‘Qurse pronounced by the devoted Cidipus upon his sons. — Noveltics intre- 
duced by Sophoklés. — Death of Gidipus — quarrel of Eteoklés and Poly- 
nikés for the sceptre. —Polynikés retires to Aiton aid given to him by 
Adrastus.— Amphiardus and Eriphylé. — Seven chiefs of the army against 
Thébes. — Defeat of the Thébans in the field — heroic devotion of Me 
mekeus, — Single combat of Eteoklés and Polynikés, in which both perish. 
— Repulse and destruction of the Argean chiefs — all except Adrastus — 
Amphiaraus is swallowed up in the earth. — Kredn, king of Thebes, forbids 
the burial of Polynikés and the other fallen Argeian chiefs. — Devotion 
and death of Antigoné. — The Athenians interfere to procure the interment 
of the fallen chiefs. —- Second siege of Thébes by Adrastus with the Epi- 
goni, or sons of those slain in the first. — Victory of the Epigoni—cap- 
ture of Thebés. — Worship of Adrastus at Siky6n—how abrogated by 
Kleisthenés. — Alkmz6on — his matricide and punishment. — Fatal neck 
laceor rink yl6. oo e05 4.1, oe TE UL US oH oaivvlaldie veccees 209284 


CHAPTER XV. 


LEGEND OF TROY. 


Great extent and variety of the tale of Troy.— Dardanus, son of Zeus. — 
Tlus, founder of Ilium.— Walls of Ilion built by Poseidén. — Capture of 
Ilium by Héraklés.— Priam and_his offspring. — Paris—his judgment 
on the three goddesses. — Carries off Helen from Sparta. — Expedition 
of the Greeks to recover her,— Heroes from all parts of Greece com 
bined under Agamemnén. — Achilles and Odysseus. — The Grecian host 
mistakes Teuthrania for Troy — Telephus.— Detention of the Greeks at 
Aulis — Agamemnon and Iphigeneia. — First success of the Greeks on 
Janding near Troy.—Briséis awarded to Achilles. — Palamédés — his 
genius, and treacherous death. — Epic chronology —historicized. — Period 
of the Homeric Iliad. — Hectér killed by Achilles. — New allies of Troy — 
Penthesileia. —Memmén — killed by Achilles. — Death of Achilles.— 
Funeral games celebrated in honor of him. — Quarrel about his apni eh 
— Odysseus prevails and Ajax kills himself— Philoktétés and Neoptol- 
emus. — Capture of the Palladium.— The wooden horse. — Destruction 
of Troy. — Distribution of the captives among the victors. — Helen restored 
to Menelaus—lives in dignity at Sparta—passes to a happy immor- 
tality: — Blindness and cure of the poet Stesichorus—alteration of the 
legend about Helen. — Egyptian tale about Helen — tendency to histor- 
icize. — Return of the Greeks from Troy.— Their sufferings — anger of 
the gods. — Wanderings of the heroes in all directions. — Memorials of 
them throughout the Grecian world. — Odysseus —his final adventures 
and death. — /Eneas and his descendants. — Different stories about Aineas, 
— Aneadex at Sképsis. — Ubiquity of AEneas.— Antendér. — Tale of Troy 
— its magnitude and discrepancies, — Trojan war — essentially legendary 
— its importance as an item in Grecian national faith. — Basis of history 
for it— possible, and nothing more.— Historicizing innovations — Dio 
Chrysostom. — Historical Ilium. — Generally received and visited as the 
town of Priam.— Respect shown to it by Alexander.— Successors of 
Alexander — foundation of Alexandreia Tréas.— The Romans — treat 
Hliam with marked respect. — Mythical legitimacy of Dium — first called 
in question by Démétrius of Sképsis and Hestiwsa.— Supposed Old Ilium, 
or real ‘Troy, distinguished from New Ilium.— Strabo alone believes in 
Old Ilium as the real Troy — other authors continue in the old faith- 


CONTENTS. xxiii 


the moderns foliow Strabo.— The mythical faith not shaken by tope 
raphical impossibilities. — Historical ‘Tréas and the Teukrians. — Rolie 
reeks in the Tréad —the whole territory gradually Aolized. — Old date, 
and long prevalence of the worship of Apollo Sminthius.— Asiatic cus- 
toms and religion — blended with Hellenic. —Sibylline prophecies. — Set- 
tlements from Miléteus, Mityléné, and Athens. .............. 284-340. 


CHAPTER XVI. 


GRECIAN MYTHES, AS UNDERSTOOD, FELT, AND INTERPRETED BY THE 
GREEKS THEMSELVES 


The mythes formed the entire mental stock of the early Greeks. — State of 
mind out of which they arose. — Tendency to universal personification. — 
Absence of positive knowledge — supplied by personifying faith. — Mul- 
titude and variety of quasi-human personages. — What we read as poeti- 
eal faneies, were to the Greeks serious realities. — The gods and heroes — 
their chief agency cast back into the past, and embodied in the mythes. — 
Marked and manifold types of the Homeric gods. — Stimulus which they 
afforded to the mythopeeic faculty. — Easy faith in popular and plausible 
stories. — Poets — receive their matter from the divine inspiration of the 
Muse. — Meaning of the word mythe — original — altered. — Matter of 
actual history — uninteresting to early Greeks. — Mythical faith and reli- 
gious point of view — paramount in the Homeric age. — Gradual develop- 
ment of the scientific point of view — its opposition to the religious. — 
Mythopeic age — anterior to this dissent.— Expansive force of Grecian 
intellect. — Transition towards positive and present fact. — The poet be- 
comes the organ of present time instead of past.— Iambic, elegiac, and 
lyric poets. — Influence of the opening of Egypt to Grecian commerce, 
B.C. 660. — Progress — historical, geographical, social — from that period 
to B. c. 500. — Altered standard of judgment, ethical and intellectual. — 
Commencement of physical science — Thalés, Xenophanés, Pythagoras. 
—Impersonal nature conceived as an object of study. — Opposition be- 
tween scientific method and the religious feeling of the multitude. — How 
dealt with by different philosophers. — Socratés. —- Hippocratés. — Anax- 
agoras.— Contrasted with Grecian religious belief.— Treatment of So 
eratés by the Athenians. — Scission between the superior men and the 
multitude — important in reference to the mythes.— The mythes accom- 
modated to a new tone of feeling and judgment. — The poets and logo- 
graphers. — Pindar. — Tragic poets. — Aichylus and Sophoklés. — Ten 
dencies of Auschylus in regard to the old legends.—He maintains undi- 
minished the grandeur of the mythical world. — Euripidés — accused of 
vulgarizing the mythical heroes, and of introducing exaggerated pathos, 
refinement, and rhetoric. — The logographers — Pherekydés, etc.— Heka- 
teus — the mythes rationalized. — The historians — Herodotus. — Earnest 
piety of Herodotus —his mystic reserve.— His views of the mythical 

d.— His deference for Egypt and Egyptian statements. — His general 
faith in the mythical heroes and eponyms — yet combined with scepticism 
as to matters of ‘fact.— His remarks upon the miraculous foundation of 
the oracle at. Déd6na.— His remarks upon Melampus and his prophetic 
powers. — His remarks upon the Thessalian legend of Tempé.— Alle- 
gorical interpretation of the mythes— more and more esteemed and 
applied. — Divine legends ailegorized.— Heroic legends historicized. — 
Limits to this interpreting process. — Distinction between gods and dx 
mons — altered and widened by Empedoclés. — Admission of deemons as 
partiaily evil beings — effect of such admission. — Semi-historical inter- 


xxiv CONTENTS. 


retation — utmost waich it can accomplish. — Some positive certificate 
indispensable as a constituent of historical proof—mere popular faith 
insufficient. — Mistake of ascribing to an unrecording age the hi 
sense of modern times. — Matter of tradition uncertified from the beginning. 
— Fictitious matter of tradition does not imply fraud or imposture. — 
Plausible fiction often generated and accredited by the mere force of strong 
and corsmon sentiment, even in times of instruction. — Allegorical thoory 
of the mythes—traced by some up to an ancient priestly caste. — Real 
import of the mythes supposed to be preserved in the religious mysteries. 
— Supposed ancient meaning is really a modern interpretation. — Triple 
theology of the pagan world. Treatment and use of the mythes according 
to Plato. — His views as to the necessity and use of fiction. — He deals 
with the mythes as expressions of feeling and imagination — sustained by 
religious faith, and not by any positive basis. — Grecian antiquity esssen- 
tially a religious conception. — Application of chronologicdl calculation 
divests it of this character.— Mythical genealogies all of one class, and 
all on a level in respect to evidence. — Grecian and Egyptian genealogies. 
— Value of each is purely subjective, having especial reference to the faith 
of the people. — Gods and men undistinguishable in Grecian antiquity. — 
General recapitulation. — General public of Greece — familiar with their 
local mythes, careless of recent history.— Religious festivals — their com- 
memorative influence. — Variety and universality of mythical relics. — 
The mythes in their bearing on Grecian art. — Tendency of works of art 
to intensify the mythical faith. ........... cencecccevecsses sp eB4OuGl 


CHAPTER XVII. 


THE GRECIAN MYTHICAL VEIN COMPARED WITH THAT OF MODERN 
EUROPE. 


Midoc — Sage — an universal manifestation of the human mind.— Analo 
of the Germans and Celts with the Greeks. — Differences between them. 
-— Grecian poetry matchless. — Grecian progress self-operated. — German 
progress brought about by violent influences from without. — Operation of 
the Roman civilization and of Christianity upon the primitive German 
mythes.— Alteration in the mythical genealogies — Odin and the other 
gods degraded into men.— Grecian Paganism — what would have been 
the case, if it had been supplanted by Christianity in 500 B. c. — Saxc 
Grammaticus and Snorro Sturleson contrasted with Pherekydés and Hel- 
lanikus. — Mythopeeic tendencies in modern Europe still subsisting, but 
forced into a new channel: 1. Saintly ideal; 2. Chivalrous ideal. — Le- 
gends of the Saints — their analogy with the Homeric theology. — Chiv- 
alrous ideal — Romances of Charlemagne and Arthur.— Accepted as re- 
alities of the fore-time.— Teutonic and Scandavian epic —its analogy 
with the Grecian. — Heroic character and self-expanding subject common 
to both. — Points of distinction between the two — epic of the Middle Ages 
neither stood so completely alone, nor was so closely interwoven with reli- 
gion, as the Grecian. — History of England — how conceived down to the 
seventeenth century — began with Brute the Trojan.—Earnest and tena- 
cious faith manifested in the defence of this early history. —Judgment of 
Milton. — Standard of historical evidence —raised in regrad to d 

-not raised in regard to Greece. — Milton’s way of dealing with the 
British fabulous history objectionable. —' Two ways open of dealing with 
the Grecian mythes: 1, to omit them; or, 2, to recount them as mythes, 
— Reasons for preforring the latter.— Triple partition of past time by 
af eee eae SN a Bie haw ele Nars SONS vee» 461-489, 


HISTORY OF GREECE. 





PART I. 


LEGENDARY GREECE. 


CHAPTER I. 
LEGENDS RESPECTING THE GODS. 


Tue mythical world of the Greeks opens with the gods, 
anterior as well as superior to man: it gradually descends, first 
to heroes, and next to the human race. Along with the gods are 
found various monstrous natures, ultra-human and extra-human, 
who cannot with propriety be called gods, but who partake with 
gods and men in the attributes of freewill, conscious agency, and 
susceptibility of pleasure and pain,— such as the Harpies, the 
Gorgons, the Grew, the Sirens, Scylla and Charybdis, Echidna, 
Sphinx, Chimera, Chrysaor, Pegasus, the Cyclépes, the Centaurs, 
etc. The first acts of what may be termed the great mythical 
cycle describe the proceedings of these gigantic agents — the 
crash and collision of certain terrific and overboiling forces, 
which are ultimately reduced to obedience, or chained up, or 
extinguished, under the more orderly government of Zeus, who 
supplants his less capable predecessors, and acquires precedence 
and supremacy over gods and men — subject however to certain 


social restraints from the chief gods and goddesses around 
VOL. I. I Loe. 


2 AISTORY OF GREECE. 


him, as well as to the custom of occasionally convoking and 
consulting the divine agora. 

I recount these events briefly, but literally, treating them 
simply as mythes springing from the same creative imagination, 
addressing themselves to analogous tastes and feelings, and de- 
pending upon the same authority, as the legends of ‘Thebes and 
Troy. It is the inspired voice of the Muse which reveals and 
authenticates both, and from which Homer and Hesiod alike 
derive their knowledge —the one, of the heroic, the other, of the 
divine, foretime. I maintain, moreover, fully, the character of 
these great divine agents as Persons, which is the light in which 
they presented themselves to the Homeric or Hesiodic audience. 
Uranos, Nyx, Hypnos and Oneiros (Heaven, Night, Sleep and 
Dream), are Persons, just as much as Zeus and Apollo. To 
resolve them into mere allegories, is unsafe and unprofitable: we 
then depart from the point of view of the original hearers, with- 
out acquiring any consistent or philosophical point of view of our 
own.! For although some of the attributes and actions ascribed 
to these persons are often explicable by allegory the whole series 
and system of them never are so: the theorist who adopts this 
course of explanation finds that, after one or two simple and 
obvious steps, the path is no longer open, and he is forced to clear 
a way for himself by gratuitous refinements and conjectures. 
The allegorical persons and attributes are always found mingled 
with other persons and attributes not allegorical; but the two 
classes cannot be severed without breaking up the whole march 
of the mythical events, nor can any explanation which drives us 
to such a necessity be considered as admissible. ‘To suppose 
indeed that these legends could be all traced by means of alle- 
gory into a coherent body of physical doctrine, would be incon- 
sistent with all reasonable presumptions respecting the age or 
society in which they arose. Where the allegorical mark is 
clearly set upon any particular character, or attribute, or event, 
to that extent we may recognize it; but we can rarely venture to 
divine further, still less to alter the legends themselves on the 
faith of any such surmises. The theogony ef the Greeks contains 





‘It is sufficient, here, to state this position briefly: more will be said 
respecting the allsgorizing interpretation in a future O:svier. 


. 
LEGENDS RESPECTING THE GODS. 8 


some cosmogonic ideas ; but it cannot be considered as a system 
of cosmogony, or translated into a string of elementary, planet- 
ary, or physical changes. 

In the order of legendary chronology, Zeus comes after 
Kronos and Uranos; but in the order of Grecian conception, 
Zeus is the prominent person, and Kronos and Uranos are 
inferior and introductory precursors, set up in order to be over- 
thrown and to serve as mementos of the prowess of their con- 
queror. To Homer and Hesiod, as well as to the Greeks 
universally, Zeus is the great and predominant god, “the father 
of gods and men,” whose power none of the other gods can hope 
to resist, or even deliberately think of questioning. All the 
other gods have their specific potency and peculiar sphere of 
action and duty, with which Zeus does not usually interfere; but 
it is he who maintains the lineaments of a providential superin- 
tendence, as well over the phenomena of Olympus as over those 
of earth. Zeus and his brothers Poseidon and Hadés have made 
a division of power: he has reserved the ether and the atmos- 
phere to himself — Poseidon has obtained the sea— and Hadés 
the under-world or infernal regions; while earth, and the events 
which pass upon earth, are common to all of them, together with 
free access to Olympus.! 

Zeus, then, with his brethren and colleagues, constitute the 
present gods, whom Homer and Hesiod recognize as: in full 
dignity and efficiency. The inmates of this divine world are 
conceived upon the model, but not upon the scale, of the human. 
They are actuated by the full play and variety of those appetites, 
sympathies, passions and affections, which divide the soul of man ; 
invested with a far larger and indeterminate measure of power, 
and an exemption as well from death as (with some rare excep- 
tions) from suffering and infirmity. The rich and diverse types 
thus conceived, full of energetic movement and contrast, each in 
his own province, and soaring confessedly above the limits of 





! See Iliad, viii. 405, 463; xv. 20,.130, 185. Hesiod, Theog. 885. 

This unquestioned supremacy is the general representation of Zeus: at 
the same time the conspiracy of Héré, Poseidén, and Athéné against him, 
suppressed by the unexpected apparition of Briareus as his ally, is among 
the exceptions. (Iliad;i. 400.) Zeus is at one time vanquished by Titan, 
but rescued by Hermés. (Apollodor. i. 6, 3), 


4 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


experience, were of all themes the most suitable for adventure 
and narrative, and operated with irresistible force upon the 
Grecian fancy. All nature was then conceived as moving and 
working through a number of personal agents, amongst whom 
the gods of Olympus were the most conspicuous; the reverential 
belief in Zeus and Apollo being only one branch of this omni- 
present personifying faith. The attributes of all these agents 
had a tendency to expand themselves into illustrative legends ~— 
especially those of the gods, who were constantly invoked in the 
public worship. Out of this same mental source sprang both 
the divine and heroic mythes — the former being often the more 
extravagant and abnormous in their incidents, in proportion as 
the general type of the gods was more vast and awful than that 
of the heroes. 

As the gods have houses and wives like men, so the present 
dynasty of gods must have a past to repose upon;! and the 
curious and imaginative Greek, whenever he does not find a 
recorded past ready to his hand, is uneasy until he has created 
one. Thus the Hesiodic theogony explains, with a certain degree 
of system and coherence, first the antecedent circumstances under 
which Zeus acquired the divine empire, next the number of his 
colleagues and descendants. 

First in order of time (we are told by Hesiod) came Chaos; 
next Gea, the broad, firm, and flat Earth, with deep and dark 
Tartarus at her base. Erés (Love), the subduer of gods as well 
as men, came immediately afterwards.2 

From Chaos sprung Erebos and Nyx; from these latter 
ZEthér and Hémera. Gea also gave birth to Uranos, equal in 
breadth to herself, in order to serve both as an overarching vault 
to her, and as a residence for the immortal gods ; she further 
produced the mountains, habitations of the divine nymphs, and 
Pontus, the barren and billowy sea. 

Then Gea intermarried with Uranos, and from this union 
came a numerous offspring — twelve Titans and Titanides, three 
Cyclépes, and three Hekatoncheires or beings with a hundred 





1 Arist. Polit. i. 1. Gomep 52 ai ra eidn Eavtotg ddopowodiow dvbpwrot, ob- 
tac Kal Tove Biove, TOV Dedv. 

2 Hesiod, Theog. 116. Apollodérus begins with Uranos and Gaza (i. 1}. 
he does not recognize Eros, Nyx, or Erebos. 


vs oe — —_ 


URANOS AND KRONOS. ; % 


hands each. The Titans were Oceanus, Koos, Krios, Hyperién. 
Tapetos, and Kronos: the Titanides, Theia, Rhea, Themis, 
Mnémosyné, Pheebé, and Téthys. The Cyclépes were Brontés, 
Steropés, and Argés, — formidable persons, equally distinguished 
for strength and for manual craft, so that they made the thunder 
which afterwards formed the irresistible artillery of Zeus.! 
The Hekatoncheires were Kottos, Briareus, and Gygés, of pro- 
digious bodily force. 

Urarios contemplated this powerful brood with fear and hor- 
ror; as fast as any of them were born, he concealed them in 
cavities of the earth, and would not permit them to come out. 
Gea could find no room for them, and groaned under the pres- 
sure: she produced iron, made a sickle, and implored her sons to 
avenge both her and themselves against the oppressive treatment 
of their father. But none of them, except Kronos, had courage 
to undertake the deed: he, the youngest and the most daring, 
was armed with the sickle and placed in suitable ambush by the 
contrivance of Gea. Presently night arrived, and Uranos 
descended to the embraces of Gaa: Kronos then emerged from 
his concealment, cut off the* genitals of his father, and cast the 
bleeding member behind him far away into the sea.2 Much of 
the blood was spilt upon the earth, and Gea in consequence gave 
birth to the irresistible Erinnys, the vast and muscular Gigantes, 
and the Melian nymphs. Out of the genitals themselves, as they 
swam and foamed upon the sea, emerged the goddess Aphrodité, 
deriving her name from the foam out of which she had sprung. 
She first landed at Kythéra, and then went to Cyprus: the island 
felt her. benign influence, and the green herb started up under 
her soft and delicate tread. Erés immediately joined her, and 
partook with her the function of suggesting and directing the 
amorous impulses both of gods and men.? 





? Hesiod, Theog. 140, 156. Apollod. ut sup. 

? Hesiod, Theog. 160, 182. Apollod. i. 1, 4. 

* Hesiod, Theog. 192. This legend respecting the birth of Aphrodité 
seems to have been derived partly from her name (d¢pd¢, foam), partly from 
the surname Urania, ’A¢podiry Oipavia, under which she was so very exten- 
sively worshipped, especially both in Cyprus and Cythéra, seemingly crigi- 
nated in both islands by the Phcenicians. Herodot. i. 105. Compare the 
instructive section in Boeckh’s Metrologie, e. iv. § 4. 


~ = = q e 
6 * HISTORY OF GREECE. 
oo 


Uranos being thus dethroned and disabled, Kronos and the Titana 
acquired their liberty and became predominant: the Cyclépes 
and the Hekatoncheires had been cast by Uranos into Tartarus, 
and were still allowed to remain there. 

Each of the Titans had a numerous offspring: Oceanus, 
especially, marrying his sister Téthys, begat three thousand 
daughters, the Oceanic nymphs, and as many sons: the rivers 
and springs passed for his offspring. Hyperién and his sister 
Theia had for their children Hélios, Seléné, and Eés; Keos 
with Phoebé begat Lété and Asteria; the ehildren of Krios were 
Astros, Pallas, and Persés, — from Astros and Eés sprang the 
winds Zephyrus, Boreas, and Notus. Iapetos, marrying the 
Oceanic nymph Clymené, counted as his progeny the celebrated 
Prométheus, Epimétheus, Mencetius, and Atlas. But the off 
spring of Kronos were the most powerful and transcendent of all. 
He married his sister Rhea, and had by her three daughters — 
Hestia, Démétér, and Héré — and three sons, Hadés, Poseidén, 
and Zeus, the latter at once the youngest and the greatest. 

But Kronos foreboded to himself destruction from one of his 
own children, and accordingly, as soon as any of them were born, 
he immediately swallowed them and retained them in his own 
belly. In this manner had the first five been treated, and Rhea 
was on the point of being delivered of Zeus. Grieyed and indig- 
nant at the loss of her children, she applied for counsel to her 
father and mother, Uranos and Gea, who aided her to conceal 
the birth of Zeus. They conveyed her by night to Lyktus in 
Créte, hid the new-born child in a woody cavern on Mount Ida, 
and gave to Kronos, in place of it, a stone wrapped in swaddling 
clothes, which he greedily swallowed, believing it to be his child. 
Thus was the safety of Zeus ensured.!_ As he grew up his vast 
powers fully developed themselves: at the suggestion of Gea, 
he induced Kronos by stratagem to vomit up, first the stone which 
had been given to him, —next, the five children whom he had 
previously devoured. MHestia, Démétér, Héré, Poseidén and 
Hadés, were thus allowed to grow up along with Zeus; and the 
stone to which the latter owed his preservation was placed near 





1 Hesiod, Theog. 452, 487. Apollod. i. ], 6. 


* ort > 


KRONOS AND ZEUS.*. “ 7 
the temple of Delphi, where it ever afterwards stood, as a cor: 
spicuous and venerable memorial to the religious Greek.! 

We have not yet exhausted the catalogue of beings generated 
during this early period, anterior to the birth of Zeus. Nyx, 
alone and without any partner, gave birth to a numerous pro- 

y: Thanatos, Hypnos and Oneiros; Momus and Oizys 
(Grief) ; Klothé, Lachesis and Atropos, the three Fates; the 
retributive and equalizing Nemesis; Apaté and Philotés (Deceit 
and amorous Propensity), Géras (Old Age) and Eris (Conten- 
tion). From Eris proceeded an abundant offspring, all mischiev- 
ous and maleficent: Ponos (Suifering), Léthé, Limos (Famine), 
Phonos and Maché (Slaughter and Battle), Dysnomia and Até 
(Lawlessness and reckless Impulse), and Horkos, the eyer- 
watchful sanctioner of oaths, as well as the inexorable punisher 
of voluntary perjury.? 

_ Gea, too, intermarrying with Pontus, gave birth to Nereus, 
the just and righteous old man of the sca; to Thaumas, Phorkys 
and Kéto. From Nereus, and Doris daughter of Oceanus, pro- 
ceeded the fifty Nereids or Sea-nymphs. Thaumus also married 
Elektra daughter of Oceanus, and had by her Iris and the two 
Harpies, Allé and Okypeté,— winged and swift as the winds. 
From Phorkys and Kété sprung the Dragon of the Hesperides, 
and the monstrous Gres and Gorgons: the blood of Medusa, one 
of the Gorgons, when killed by Perseus, produced Chrysaor and 
the horse Pegasus: Chrysaor and Kallirrhoé gave birth to 
Gery6n as well as to Echidna, — a creature half-nymph and half: 
serpent, unlike both to gods and to men. Other monsters arose 
from the union of Echidna with Typhaén, — Orthros, the two- 
headed dog of Geryén; Cerberus, the dog of Hadés, with fifty 
heads, and the Lernzan Hydra. From the latter prozveeded the 
Chimera, the Sphinx of Thébes, and the Nemean lion.? 

A powerful and important progeny, also, was that of Styx, 





1 Hesiod, Theog. 498. — 
Tov piv Zed ornpise xara ySovd¢ ebpvodeing 
Tlvdoi tv nyadén, yua2do¢g ixd Tapvjcoio, 
LH’ tuev tEoriow, Sadua Sryroict Bporoiat. 

* Hesiod, Theog. 212-232. 

3 Hesiod, Theog. 240-320. Apollodér. i. 2, 6, 7. 


> 
8 - HISTORY OF GREECE. 

*. % an 
daughter of Oceanus, by Pallas; she had Zélos and Niké ({mpe- 
riousness and Victory), and Kratos and Bia (Strength and Force) 
The hearty and early codperation of Styx and her four sons with 
Zeus was one of the main causes which enabled him to achieve 
his victory over the Titans. 

Zeus had grown up not less distinguished for mental capacity 
than for bodily force. He and his brothers now determined to 
wrest the power from the hands of Kronos and the Titans, and a 
long and desperate struggle commenced, in which all the gods 
and all the goddesses took part. Zeus convoked them to Olym- 
pus, and promised to all who would aid him against Kronos, that 
their functions and privileges should remain “undisturbed. The 
first who responded to the call, came with her four sons, and 
embraced his cause, was Styx. Zeus took them all four as his 
constant attendants, and conferred upon Styx the majestic distine- 
tion of being the Horkos, or oath-sanctioner of the Gods,— what 
Horkos was to men, Styx was to the Gods.1 

Still further to strengthen himself, Zeus released the other 
Uranids who had been imprisoned in Tartarus by their father, — 
the Cyclépes and the Centimanes,— and prevailed upon them to 
take part with him against the Titans. The former supplied him 
with thunder and lightning, and the latter brought into the fight 
their boundless muscular strength.2 Ten full years did the com- 
bat continue; Zeus and the Kronids occupying Olympus, and the 
Titans being established on the more southerly mountain-chain 
of Othrys.. All nature was convulsed, and the distant Oceanus, 
though he took no part in the struggle, felt the boiling, the noise, 
and the shock, not less than Gea and Pontus. The thunder of 
Zeus, combined with the crags and mountains torn up and hurled 
by the Centimanes, at length prevailed, and the Titans were de- 
feated and thurst down into Tartarus. JIapetos, Kronos, and the 
remaining Titans (Oceanus excepted) were imprisoned, perpetu- 
ally and irrevocably, in that subterranean dungeon, a wall of brass 
being built around them by Poseidoén, and the three Centimanes 
being planted as guards. Of the two sons of Iapetos, Menestius 
was made to share this prison, while Atlas was condemned to 





1 Hesiod, Theog. 385-403. 
? Hesiod, Theog. 140 624,657. Apollodér.i. 2, 4. 


= > * 


THE TITANS. « 9 
stand for ever at the extreme west, and to bear upon his shou 
ders the solid vault of heaven.! 

Thus were the Titans subdued, and the ‘Kronids with Zeus at 
their head placed in possession of power. They were not, how- 
ever, yet quite secure; for Gza, intermarrying with Tartarus, 

_gave birth to a new and still more formidable monster called Ty- 
phoeus, of such tremendous properties and promise, that, had he 
been allowed to grow into full development, nothing could have 
prevented him from vanquishing all rivals and becoming supreme. 
But Zeus foresaw the danger, smote him at once with a thunder- 
bolt from Olympus, and burnt him up: he was cast along with 
the rest into Tartarus, and no further enemy remained to question 
the sovereignty of the Kronids.? 

With Zeus begins a new dynasty and a different order of 
beings. Zeus, Poseidén, and Hadés agree upon the distribution 
before noticed, of functions and localities: Zeus retaining the 
#Ethér and the atmosphere, together with the general presiding 
function; Poseidon obtaining the sea, and administering subterra- 

_nean forces generally ; and Hadés ruling the under-world or re- 
gion in which the half-animated shadows of departed men reside. 

It has been already stated, that in Zeus, his brothers and his 
sisters, and his and their divine progeny, we find the present 
Gods; that is, those, for the most part, whom the Homeric and 
Hesiodic Greeks recognized and worshipped. The wives of Zeus 
were numerous as well as his offspring. First he married Métis, 
the wisest and most sagacious of the goddesses; but Gaa and 
Uranos forewarned him that if he permitted himself to have 
children by her, they would be stronger than himself and dethrone 
him. Accordingly when Métis was on the point of being deliv- 


1 The battle with the Titans, Hesiod, Theog. 627-735. Hesiod mentions 
nothing about the Gigantes and the Gigantomachia: Apollodérus, on the 
other hand, gives this latter in some detail, but despatches the Titans in a 
few words (i. 2,4; 1.6, 1). The Gigantes seem to be only a second edition 
of the Titans— a sort of duplication to which the legendary poets were often 
inclined. 

2 Hesiod, Theog. 820-869. Apollod. i. 6, 3. He makes Typhén very 
nearly victorious over Zeus. Typhéeus, according to Hesiod, is father of 
the irregular, violent, and mischievous winds: Notus, Boreas, Argestés and 
Zephyrus, are of divine origin (870). 


1* 





. * 


10 % aad OF GREECE. 

ered of Athéné, he reglowel her up, and her wisdom and saga- 
city thus became permanently identified with his own being.’ His 
head was subsequently cut open, in order to make way for the 
exit and birth of the goddess Athéné2 By Themis, Zeus begat 
the Hére, by Eurynomé, the three Charities or Graces; py 
Mnémosyné, the Muses; by Lété (Latona); Apollo and Artemis; 
and by Démétér, Persephoné. Last of all he took for his wife 
Héré, who maintained permanently the dignity of queen of the 
Gods; by her he had Hébé, Arés, and Eileithyia. Hermés also 
was born to him by Maia, tke daughter of Atlas: Héphestos 
was born to Héré, acccrding to some accounts, by Zeus; accord- 
ing to others, by her own unaided generative force He was 
born lame, and Héré was ashamed of him: she wished to secrete 
him away, but he made his escape into the sea, and found shelter 
under the maternal care of the Nereids Thetis and Eurynome.4 
Our enumeration of the divine race, under the presidency of Zeus, 
will thus give us,5— 

1. The twelve great gods and goddesses of Olympus,— Zeus, 
Poseidén, Appollo, Arés, Héphestos, Hermés, Héré, Athéné, 
Artemis, Aphrodite, Hestia, Démétér. 

2. An indefinite number of other deities, not included among 
the Olympic, seemingly because the number twelve was complete 
without them, but some of them not inferior in power and dignity 
to many of the twelve : — Hadés, Hélios, Hekaté, Dionysos, Lété, 

.Diéné, Persephoné, Seléné, Themis, E6s, Harmonia, the Chari- 
ties, the Muses, the Hilaithyiz, the Moerz, the Oceanids and the 
Nereids, Proteus, Eidothea, the Nymphs, Leukothea, Phorkys, 
/Eolus, Nemesis, ete. 

3. Deities who perform special services to the greater gods:— 
Tris, Hébé, the Hore, ete. 

4, Deities whose personality is more faintly and unsteadily 
conceived : — Até, the Lit, Eris, Thanatos, Hypnos, Kratos, Bia, 
Ossa, etc.6 The same name is here employed sometimes to desig- 
nate the person, sometimes the attribute or event not personi- 





1 Hesiod, Theog. 885-900. ? Apollod. i. 3, 6. 

* Hesiod, Theog. 900-944. * Homer, Iliad, xviii. 397. 

® See Burckhardt, Homer, und Hesiod. Mythologie, sect. 102. (Leipz 
844). 

§ Aiuzic — Hunger —is a person, in Hesiod, Opp. Di. 299. 


UWESIODIC THEOGONY. 11 
fied, — an unconscious transition of ideas, which, when consciously 
performed, is called Allegory. 

5. Monsters, offspring of the Gods:—the Harpies, the Gor- 
gons, the Graz, Pegasus, Chrysaor, Echidna, Chimera, the Dra- 
gon of the Hesperides, Cerberus, Orthros, Geryén, the Lernzan 
Hydra, the Nemean lion, Scylla and Charybdis, the Centaurs, the 
Sphinx, Xanthos and Balios the immortal horses, ete. 

From the gods we slide down insensibly, first to heroes, and 
then to men; but before we proceed to this new mixture, it is 
necessary to say a few words on the theogony generally. I have 
given it briefly as it stands in the Hesiodic Theogonia, because 
that poem —in spite of great incoherence and confusion, arising 
seemingly from diversity of authorship as well as diversity of 
age — presents an ancient and genuine attempt to cast the divine 
foretime into a systematic sequence. Homer and Hesiod were 
the grand authorities in the pagan world respecting theogony ; 
but in the Iliad and Odyssey nothing is found except passing 
allusions and implications, and even in the Hymns (which were 
commonly believed in antiquity to be the productions of the same 
author as the Iliad and the Odyssey) there are only isolated, un- 
connected narratives. Accordingly men habitually took their in- 
formation respecting their theogonic antiquities from the Hesiodic 
poem, where it was ready laid out before them; and the legends 
consecrated in that work acquired both an extent of circulation 
and a firm hold on the national faith, such as independent legends 
could seldom or never rival. Moreover the scrupulous and scep- 
tical Pagans, as well as the open assailants of Paganism in later 
times, derived their subjects of attack from the same source; so 
that it has been absolutely necessary to recount in their naked 
simplicity the Hesiodic stories, in order to know what it was that 
Plato deprecated and Xenophanés denounced. The strange pro- 
ceedings ascribed to Uranos, Kronos and Zeus;have been more 
frequently alluded to, in the way of ridicule or condemnation, 
than any other portion of the mythical world. 

But though the Hesiodic theogony passed’ as orthodox among 
the later Pagans,! because it stood before them as the only system 
anciently set forth and easily accessible, it was evidently not the 





1 Sée Gottling, Preefat. ad Hesiod. p. 23. 


12 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


only system received at the date of the poem itself. Homer 
knows nothing of Uranos, in the sense of an arch-God anterior 
to Kronos. Uranos and Gea, like Oceanus, Téthys and Nyx, 
are with him great and venerable Gods, but neither the one nor 
the other present the character of predecessors of Kronos and 
Zeus.! The Cyclépes, whom Hesiod ranks as sons of Uranos 
and fabricators of thunder, are in Homer neither one nor the 
other; they are not noticed in the Iliad at all, and in the Odyssey 
they are gross gigantic shepherds and cannibals, having nothing 
in common with the Hesiodic Cyclops except the one round cen- 
tral eye.2 Of the three Centimanes enumerated by Hesiod, Bri- 
areus only is mentioned in Homer, and to all appearance, not as 
the son of Uranos, but as the son of Poseidén; not as aiding 
Zeus in his combat against the Titans, but as rescuing him at a 
critical moment from a conspiracy formed against him by Héré, 
Poseidon and Athéné.# Not only is the Hesiodic Uranos (with 
the Uranids) omitted in Homer, but the relations between Zeus 
and Kronos are also presented in a very different light. No 
mention is made of Kronos swallowing his young children: on 
the contrary, Zeus is the eldest of the three brothers instead of 
the youngest, and the children of Kronos live with him and Rhea: 
there the stolen intercourse between Zeus and Heéré first takes 
place without the knowledge of their parents. When Zeus puts 
Kronos down into Tartarus, Rhea consigns her daughter Héré 
to the care of Oceanus: no notice do we find of any terrifie battle 
with the Titans as accompanying that event. Kronos, Japetos, 
and the remaining Titans are down in Tartarus, in the lowest 
depths under the earth, far removed from the genial rays of 
Helios; but they are still powerful and venerable, and Hypnos 
makes Héré swear an oath in their name, as the most inviolable 
that he can think of.5 





1 Tliad, xiv. 249; xix. 259. Odyss. v. 184. Oceanus and Téthys seem to be 
presented in the Iliad as the primitive Father and Mother of the Gods :— 
*Oxeavév te Seadv yéveowy, kal untépa Ty Vbv. (xiv. 201). 
? Odyss. ix. 87. 3 Tliad, i. 401. 4 Tliad, xiv. 203-295; xv. 204. 
5 Tliad, viii. 482; xiv. 274-279. In the Hesiodic Opp. et Di., Kronos is 
represented as ruling in the Islands of the Blest in the neighborhood of 
Oceanus (v. 168). 


HOMERIC THEOGONY. 13 


In Homer, then, we find nothing beyond the simple fact that 
Zeus thrust his father Kronos together with the remaining Titans 
into Tartarus; an event to which he affords us a tolerable parallel 
in certain occurrences even under the presidency of Zeus himself. 
For the other gods make more than one rebellious attempt against 
Zeus, and are only put down, partly by his unparalleled strength, 
partly by the presence of his ally the Centimane Briareus. Kro- 
nos, like Laértes or Péleus, has become old, and has been sup- 
planted by a force vastly superior to his own. The Homeric epic 
treats Zeus as present, and, like all the interesting heroic charac- 
ters, a father must be assigned to him: that father has once been 
the chief of the Titans, but has been superseded and put down 
into Tartarus along with the latter, so soon as Zeus and the supe- 
rior breed of the Olympic gods acquired their full development. 

That antithesis between Zeus and Kronos — between the Olym-. 
pie gods and the Titans — which Homer has thus briefly brought 
to view, Hesiod has amplified into a theogony, with many things 
new, and some things contradictory to his predecessor; while Eu- 
mélus or Arktinus in the poem called Titanomachia (now lost) 
also adopted it as their special subject.! As Stasinus, Arktinus, 
Lésches, and others, enlarged the Legend of Troy by composing 
poems relating to a supposed time anterior to the commencement, 
or subsequent to the termination of the Iliad,—as other poets 
recounted adventures of Odysseus subsequent to his landing in 
Ithaka,—so Hesiod enlarged and systematized, at the same time 
that he corrupted, the skeleton theogony which we find briefly 
indicated in Homer. There is violence and rudeness in the 
Homeric gods, but the great genius of Grecian epic is no way 
accountable for the stories of Uranos and Kronos, — the standing 
reproach against Pagan legendary narrative. 





1 See the few fragments of the Titanomachia, in Diintzer, Epic. Gree. 
Fragm. p. 2; and Hyne, ad Apollodor. I. 2. Perhaps there was more than 
one poem on the subject, though it seems that Athenzeus had only read one 
(viii. p. 277). 

In the Titanomachia, the generations anterior to Zeus were still further 
lengthened by making Uranos the son of A®thér (Fr. 4. Dintzer). Agzon 
was also represented as son of Pontus and Gza, and as having fought in the 
ranks of the Titans: in the Iliad ke (the same who is called Briareus) is the 
fast ally of Zeus. 

A Titanographia was ascribed to Musas (Schol. Apollon. Rhod iii. 1178 
compare Lactant. de Fals. Rel. i. 21). 


14 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


How far these stories are the invention of Hesiod himself is 
impossible to determine.! ‘They bring us down to a cast of fancy 





} That the Hesiodic Theogony is referable to an age considerably later 
than the Homeric poems, appears now to be the generally admitted opinion; 
and the reasons for believing so are, in my opinion, satisfactory. Whether 
the Theogony is composed by the same author as the Works and Days is a 
disputed point. The Beotian literati in the days of Pausanias decidedly 
denied the identity, and ascribed to their Hesiod only the Works and Days: 
Pausanias himself concurs with them (ix. 31. 4; ix. 35. 1), and Vélcker 
(Mithologie des Japetisch. Geschlechts, p. 14) maintains the same opinion, 
as well as Gottling (Pref. ad Hesiod. xxi.): K. O. Miiller (History of Grecian 
Literature, ch. 8. § 4) thinks that there is not sufficient evidence to form a 
decisive opinion. 

Under the name of Hesiod (in that vague language which is usual in an- 
tiquity respecting authorship, but which modern critics have not much mend- 
ed by speaking of the Hesiodic school, sect, or family) passed many differ- 
ent poems, belonging to three classes quite distinct from each other, but all 
disparate from the Homeric epic: —1. ‘The poems of legend cast into histo- 
rical and genealogical series, such as the Eoiai, the Catalogue of Women, 
etc. 2. The poems of a didactic or ethical tendency, such as the Works and 
Days, the Precepts of Cheirén, the Artof Augural Prophecy, etc. 3. Sep- 
arate and short mythical compositions, such as the Shield of Héraklés, the 
Marriage of Keyx (which, however, was of disputed authenticity, Athenzx. 
ii. p.49), the Epithalamium of Péleus and Thetis, ete. (See Marktscheffel, 
Preefat. ad Fragment. Hesiod. p. 89). 

The Theogony belongs chiefly to the first of these classes, but it has also 
a dash of the second in the legend of Prométheus, etc.: moreover in the por- 
tion which respects Hekaté, it has both a mystic character and a distinct 
bearing upon present life and customs, which we may also trace in the allu- 
sions to Kréte and Delphi. ‘There seems reason to place it in the same age 
with the Works and Days, perhaps in the half century preceding 700 B. ¢., 
and little, if at all, anterior to Archilochus. The poem is evidently conceiy- 
ed upon one scheme, yet the parts are so disorderly and incoherent, that it 
is difficult to say how much is interpolation. Hermann has well dissected 
the exordium ; see the preface to Gaisford’s Hesiod (Poetz Minor. p. 63). 

K. O. Miller tells us (ut sup. p. 90), “ The Titans, according to the notions 
of Hesiod, represent a system of things in which elementary beings, natural 
powers, and notions of order and regularity are united to form a whole. The 
Cyclopes denote the transient disturbances of this order of nature by storms, 
and the Hekatoncheires, or hundred-handed Giants, signify the fearful pow- 
er of the greater revolutions of nature.” The poem affords little presump- 
tion that any such ideas were present to the mind of its author, as, I 
think, will be seen if we read 140-155, 630-745. 

The Titans, the Cyclépes, and the Hekatoncheires, can no more be con- 
strued into physical phenomena than Chrysaor, Pegasus, Echidna, the Gree, 
or the Gorgons Zeus, like Héraklés, or Jas6n, or Perseus, if his advea- 


LEGENDS ABOUT ZEUS. 15 


more coarse and indelicate than the Homeric, and more nearly 
resembling some of the Holy Chapters (fegoi 2¢yor) of the more 
recent mysteries, such (for example) as the tale of Dionysos Za- 
greus. ‘There is evidence in the Theogony itself that the author 
was acquainted with local legends current both at Kréte and at 
Delphi; for he mentions both the mountain-cave in Kréte where- 
in the new-born Zeus was hidden, and the stone near the Del- 
phian temple — the identical stone which Kronos had swallowed 
— “placed by Zeus himself as a sign and wonder to mortal men.” 
Both these two monuments, which the poet expressly refers to, 
and had probably seen, imply a whole train of accessory and ex- 
planatory local legends — current probably among the priests of 
Kréte and Delphi, between which places, in ancient times, there 
was an intimate religious connection. And we may trace further 
in the poem,— that which would be the natural feeling of Krétan 
worshippers of Zeus,— an effort to make out that Zeus was jus- 
tified in his aggression on Kronos, by the conduct of Kronos 
himself both towards his father and towards his children: the 
treatment of Kronos by Zeus appears in Hesiod as the retribu- 
tion foretold and threatened by the mutilated Uranos against the 
son who had outraged him. In fact the relations of Uranos and 
Gea are in almost all their particulars a mere copy and duplication 
of those between Kronos and Rhea, differing only in the mode 
whereby the final catastrophe is brought about. Now castration 
was a practice thoroughly abhorrent both to the feelings and to 
the customs of Greece;! but it was seen with melancholy fre- 





tures are to be described, must have enemies, worthy of himself and his 
vast type, and whom it is some credit for him to overthrow. Those who 
contend with him or assist him must be conceived on a scale fit to be drawn 
on the same imposing canvas: the dwarfish proportions of man will not 
satisfy the sentiment of the poet or his audience respecting the grandeur and 
glory of the gods. To obtain creations of adequate sublimity for such an 
object, the poet may occasionally borrow analogies from the striking acci- 
dents of physical nature, and when such an allusion manifests itself clearly, 
the critic does well to point it out. But it seems to mea mistake to treat 
these appreximations to physical phenomena as forming the main scheme of 
the poet,— to look for them everywhere, and to presume them where there 
is little or no indication. 

1 The strongest evidences of this feeling are exhibited in Herodotus, iii 
48; viii 105. See an example of this mutilation inflicted upon a youth 


16 IMS10RY JF GREECE. 


quency in the domestic life as well as in the religious worship of 
Phrygia and other parts of Asia, and it even became the special 
qualification of a priest of the Great Mother Cybelé,! as well as 
of the Ephesian Artemis. The employment of the sickle aserib- 
ed to Kronos seems to be the product of an imagination familiar 
with the Asiatic worship and legends, which were connected with 
and partially resembled the Krétan.? And this deduction be- 
comes the more probable when we connect it with the first gen- 
esis of iron, which Hesiod mentions to have been produced for 
the express purpose of fabricating the fatal sickle ; for metallurgy 
finds a place in the early legends both of the Trojan and of the 
Krétan Ida, and the three Idzan Dactyls, the legendary inven- 
tors of it, are assigned sometimes to one and sometimes to the 
other. i: ches Sa 

As Hesiod had extended the Homeric series of gods by prefix 
ing the dynasty of Uranos to that of Kronos, so the Orphic theog- 





named Adamas by the Thracian king Kotys, in Aristot. Polit. v. 8, 12, and 
the tale about the Corinthian Periander, Herod. iii. 48. 

It is an instance of the habit, so frequent among the Attic tragedians, of 
ascribing Asiatic or Phrygian manners to the Trojans, when Sophoclés in 
his lost play Troilus (ap. Jul. Poll. x. 165) introduced one of the characters 
of his drama as having been castrated by order of Hecuba, SxaAup yap 
bpxere Bacraic éxtéuvovo’ éuobc,— probably the Tla:daywyéc, or guardian and 
companion of the youthful Troilus. See Welckcr, Griechisch. Tragéd. vol, 
i. p. 125. 

1 Herodot. viii. 105, ebyodyor. Lucian, De Dea Syrid, ¢. 50. Strabo, xiv. 
pp. 640-641. 

2 Diodor. v. 64. Strabo, x. p. 460. Hoeckh, in his learned work Kréta 
(vol. i. books 1 and 2), has collected all the information attainable respecting 
the early influences of Phrygia and Asia Minor upon Kréte: nothing seems 
ascertainable except the general fact; all the particular evidences are lamen- 
tably vague. 

The worship of the Diktean Zeus seemed to have originally belonged to 
the Eteokrétes, who were not Hellens, and were more akin to the Asiatic 
population than to the Hellenic. Strabo, x. p.478. Hoeckh, Kréta, vol. i, 
p. 139. 

’ 3 Hesiod, Theogon. 161, 


Ala 68 rotjoaca yévoc roh.0b adapavrog 

Tedge péya dpéravor, ete. 
See the extract from the old poem Phorénis ap. Schol. Apoll Nhod. 1129; 
and Strabo, x. p. 472. 


ORPHIC THEOGONY. 17 


Guy Iengthened it still further.t First came Chronos, or Time, 
as a person, after him /Ethér and Chaos, out of whom Chronos 
produced the vast mundane egg. Hence enterged in process of 
time the first-born god Phanés, or Métis, or Hérikapzos, a per- 
son of double sex, who first generated the Kosmos, or mundane 
system, and who carried within him the seed of the gods. He 
gave birth to Nyx, by whom he begat Uranos and Gea; as well 
as to Hélios and Seléne.2 

From Uranos and Gea sprang the three Meere, or Fates, the 
three Centimanes and the three Cyclopes: these latter were cast 
by Uranos into Tartarus, under the foreboding that they would 
rob him of his dominion. In revenge for this maltreatment of 
her sons, Gea produced of herself the fourteen Titans, seven 
male and seven female: the former were Koeos, Krios, Phorkys, 
Kronos, Oceanus, Hyperion and Iapetos ; the latter were Themis, 
Téthys, Mnémosyné, Theia, Diéné, Phoebé and Rhea? They 
received the name of Titans because they avenged upon Ura- 
nos the expulsion of their elder brothers. Six of the Titans, 
headed by Kronos the most powerful of them all, conspiring 
against Uranos, castrated and dethroned him: Oceanus alone stood 
aloof and took no part in the aggression. Kronos assumed the 
government and fixed his seat on Olympos; while Oceanus 
remained apart, master of his own divine stream.4 The reign 





See the scanty fragments of the Orphic theogony in Hermann’s edition 
of the Orphica, pp. 448, 504, which it is difficult to understand and piece 
together, even with the aid of Lobeck’s elaborate examination (Aglaopha- 
mus, p. 470, etc.). The passages are chiefly preserved by Proclus and the 
later Platonists, who seem to entangle them almost inextricably with their 
own philosophical ideas, 

The first few lines of the Orphic Argonautica contain a brief summary of 

the chief points of the theogony. 
. ? See Lobeck, Aglaoph. p. 472-476, 490-500, Miriv orépua gépovra Beds 
kAvtov ’Hprkeraiov; again, O7Ave Kat yevérwop Kparepd¢ Sed¢ "Hprxéxaroc. 
Compare Lactant. iv. 8,4: Suidas, v. @évy¢: Athenagoras, xx. 296: Dio- 
dor. i. 27. 

This egg figures, as might be expected, in the cosmogony set forth by the 
Birds, Aristophan. Ay. 695. Nyx gives birth to an egg, ou} of which steps 
the golden Erés’, from Erés and Chaos spring the race of birds. 

* Lobeck, Ag. p.504. Athenagor. xv. p. 64. 

4 Lobeck, Ag. p. 507. Plato, Timeus, p. 41. In the Avovicov rpédgor of 
ZEschylus, the old attendants of the god Dionysos were said to have been 

VOL. I. 20. 


18 ~ HISTORY OF GREECE. 


of Kronos was a period of tranquillity and happiness, as well as 
of extraordinary longevity and vigor. 

Kronos and Rhea gave birth to Zeus and his brothers and sis- 
ters. ‘The concealment and escape of the infant Zeus, and the 
swallowing of the stone by Kronos, are given in the Orphiec 
Theogony substantially in the same manner as by Hesiod, only 
in a style less simple and more mysticized. Zeus is concealed in 
the cave of Nyx, the seat of Phanés himself, along with Eidé 
and Adrasteia, who nurse and preserve him, while the armed 
dance and sonorous instruments of the Kurétes prevent his 
infant cries from reaching the ears of Kronos. When grown up, 
he lays a snare for his father, intoxicates him with honey, and 
having surprised him in the depth of sleep, enchains and cas- 
trates him.t. Thus exalted to the supreme mastery, he swallowed 
and absorbed into himself Métis, or Phanés, with all the preéx- 
isting elements of things, and then generated all things anew out 
of his own being and conformably to his own divine ideas.2 So 
scanty are the remains of this system, that we find it difficult to 
trace individually the gods and goddesses sprung from Zeus 





cut up and boiled in a caldron, and rendered again young, by Medeia. 
Pherecydés and Simonidés said that Jasén himself had been so dealt with. 
Schol. Aristoph. Equit. 1321. 

1 Lobeck, p. 514. Porphyry, de Antro Nympharum, c. 16. @yo? yap Tap 
"Opdei ) NdE, TH Act brorudepévy tov did Tod péAtTo¢ déAov, 

Eir’ dv df uv idgat bd dpvotv tnpixdporot 
"Epyotowy peSiovra pedtcodwr épBiuBor, 
Airixa pv djoov, 

"O xat racyet 6 Kpévoc Kat deBete éxréuverat, O¢ Otpavec. 

Compare Timeus ap. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 983, 

2 The Cataposis of Phanés by Zeus one of the most memorable points 
of the Orphic Theogony. Lobeck, p. 519.; also Fragm. vi. p. 456 of Her- 
mann’s. Orphica. 

From this absorption and subsequent reproduction of all things by Zeus, 
flowed the magnificent string of Orphic predicates about him, — 


Zede apy}, Lede pécoa, Arde & éx wavra térvKtat, — 


an allusion to which is traceable even in Plato, de Legg. iv. p. 715. Plutarch, 
de Defectu Oracul. T. ix. p. 379. c. 48. Diodérus (i. 11) is the most ancient 
writer remaining to us who mentions the name of Phanés, in a line cited as 
proceeding from Orpheus; wherein, however, Phanés is identified with 
Dionysos, Compare Macrobius, Saturnal i. 18. 


ZEUS AND ZAGREUS. — 19 


beyond Apollo, Dionysos, and Persephoné,—the latter being 
confounded with Artemis and Hekaté. 

But there is one new personage, begotten by Zeus, who stands 
preéminently marked in the Orphic Theogony, and whose adven- 
tures constitute one of its peculiar features. Zagreus, “the 
horned child,” is the son of Zeus by his own daughter Perse- 
phoné: he is the favorite of his father, a child of magnificent 
promise, and predestined, if he grow up, to succeed to supreme 
dominion as well as to the handling of the thunderbolt. He is 
seated, whilst an infant, on the throne beside Zeus, guarded by 
Apollo and the Kurétes. But the jealous Héré intercepts his 
career and incites the Titans against him, who, having first 
smeared their faces with plaster, approach him on the throne, 
tempt his childish fancy with playthings, and kill him with a 
sword while he is contemplating his face in a mirror. They then 
cut up his body and boil it in a caldron, leaving only the heart, 
which is picked up by Athéné and carried to Zeus, who in his 
wrath strikes down the Titans with thunder into Tartarus ; whilst 
Apollo is directed to collect the remains of Zagreus and bury 
them at the foot of Mount Parnassus. The heart is given to 
Semelé, and Zagreus is born again from her under the form of 
Dionysos.1 





1 About the tale of Zagreus, see Lobeck, p. 552, sgg. Nonnus inhis Dior- 
ysiaca has given many details about it: — 


Zaypéa yevayévyn Képvev Bpégoc, ete. (vi. 264). 


Clemens Alexandrin. Admonit. ad Gent. p. 11,12, Sylb. The story was 
treated both by Callimachus and by Euphorién, Etymolog. Magu. v. 
Zayped¢, Schol. Lycophr. 208. In the old epic poem Alkmzénis or Epi- 
goni, Zagreus is a surname of Hadés. See Fragm. 4, p. 7, ed. Dintzer. 
Respecting the Orphic Theogony generally, Brandis (Handbuch der Ges- 
chichte der Griechisch-Rémisch. Philosophie, c. xvii., xviii.), K. O. Miiller 
(Prolegg. Mythol. pp. 379-396), and Zoega (Abhandlungen, v. pp. 211-263) 
may be consulted with much advantage. Brandis regards this Theogony 
as considerably older than the first Ionic philosophy, which is a higher anti- 
quity than appears probable: some of the ideas which it contains, such, for 
example, as that of the Orphic egg, indicate a departure from the string of 
purely personal generations which both Homer and Hesiod exclusively 
recount, and a resort to something like physical analogies, On the whole, 
we cannot reasonably claim for it more than half a century above the age 
of Onomakritus. The Theogony of Pherekydés of Syros seems to have 


20 ' TISTORY OF GREECE. 


Such is the tissue of violent fancies comprehended under the 
title of the Orphic Theogony, and read as such, it appears, by 
Plato, Isokratés and Aristotle. It will be seen that it is based 
upon the Hesiodic Theogony, but according to the general expan- 
sive tendency of Grecian legend, much new matter is added: 
Zeus has in Homer one predecessor, in Hesiod two, and in 
Orpheus four. 

The Hesiodiec Theogony, though later in date than the Iliad 
and Odyssey, was coeval with the earliest period of what may be 
called Grecian history, and certainly of an age earlier than 700 
B. 0. Itappears to have been widely circulated in Greece, and 
being at once ancient and short, the general public consulted it as 
their principal source of information respecting divine antiquity. 
The Orphic Theogony belongs to a later date, and contains the 
Hesiodic ideas and persons, enlarged and mystically disguised : 
its vein of invention was less popular, adapted more to the con- 
templation of a sect specially prepared than to the taste of a 
casual audience, and it appears accordingly to have obtained cur- 
rency chiefly among purely speculative men.!_ Among the major- 





borne some analogy to the Orphic. See Diogen. Laért. i. 119, Sturz. Frag- 
ment. Pherekyd. § 5-6, Brandis, Handbuch, ut sup. c. xxii. DPherekydés 
partially deviated from the mythical track or personal successions set forth by 
Hesiod. éme? of ye wemeywévor abrov kal TO ph mvdLK Gc Gxavta Aéyen, 
olov Pepexvdng Kat Erepoi rivec, ete.  (Aristot. Metaphys. N. p. 301, ed. 
Brandis). Porphyrius, de Antro Nymphar. c. 31, «a? tod Zupiov bepexvdov 
pevxods kat BoSpovg Kat dvtpa Kal Yipac kal rbAac AéyovToc, Kat dia TObTwY 
aivitrouévov tag Tov Wydv yevécerc Kal aroyevécetc, ete. Kudémus tho 
Peripatetic, pupil of Aristotle, had drawn up an account of the Orphie The- 
ogony as well as of the doctrines of Pherekydés, Akusilaus and others, which 
was still in the hands of the Platonists of the fourth century, though it is 
now lost. The extracts which we find seem all to countenance the belief that 
the Hesiodic Theogony formed the basis upon which they worked. See 
about Akusilaus, Plato, Sympos. p. 178. Clem. Alex. Strom. p. 629. 

! The Orphic Theogony is never cited in the ample Scholia on Homer, 
though Hesiod is often alluded to. (See Lobeck, Aglaoph. p. 540). Nor 
can it have been present to the minds of Xenophanés and Herakleitus, as 
representing any widely diffused Grecian belief: the former, who so severely 
condemned Homer and Hesiod, would have found Orpheus much more 
deserving of his censure: and the latter could hardly have omitted Orpheus 
from his memorable denunciation : — TloAvpadin voor ob diddoKer- ‘Hoiodov 
yap dv séidake kat Wvdayépyv, aiticg 62 Revopaved re kai ‘Exataiov. Diog. 
Laér. ix. 1. Isokratés treats Orpheus as the most censurable of all the poets. 


HESIOD AND ORPHEUS. 9} 


ity of these latter, however, it acquired greater veneration, and 
above all was supposed to be of greater antiquity, than the 
Hesiodic. The belief in its superior antiquity (disallowed by 
Herodotus, and seemingly also by Aristotle!), as well as the 
respect for its contents, increased during the Alexandrine age and 
through the declining centuries of Paganism, reaching its maxi- 
mum among the New-Platonists of the third and fourth century 
after Christ: both the Christian assailants, as well as the defend- 
ers, of paganism, treated it as the most ancient and venerable 
summary of the Grecian faith. Orpheus is celebrated by Pindar 
as the harper and companion of the Argonautic maritime heroes: 
Orpheus and Muszeus, as well as Pamphdés and Olén, the great 
supposed authors of theogonic, mystical, oracular, and prophetic 
verses and hymns, were generally considered by literary Greeks 
as older than either Hesiod or Homer :? and such was also the 
common opinion of modern scholars until a period comparatively 
recent. It has now been shown, on sufficient ground, that the 





See Busiris, p. 229; ii. p. 309, Bekk. The Theogony of Orpheus, as con- 
ceived by Apollonius Rhodius (i. 504) in the third century B. C., and by 
Nigidius in the first century B. c. (Servius ad Virgil. Eclog. iv. 10), seems to 
have been on a more contracted scale than that which is given in the text. 
But neither of them notice the tale of Zagreus, which we know to be as old 
us Onomakritus. 

? This opinion of Herodotus is implied in the remarkable passage about 
Homer and Hesiod, ii. 53, though he never once names Orpheus — only 
alluding once to “ Orphic ceremonies,” ii. 81. He speaks more than once of 
the prophecies of Muszeus. Aristotle denied the past existence and reality 
of Orpheus. See Cicero de Nat. Deor. i. 38. 

* Pindar Pyth. iv. 177. Plato seems to consider Orpheus as more ancient 
than Homer. Compare Theetét. p. 179; Cratylus, p. 402; De Bepubl. ii. p. 
364. The order in which Aristophanés (and Hippias of Elis, ap. Clem. 
Alex. Str. vi. p. 624) mentions them indicates the same view, Ranzx, 1030. 
It is unnecessary to cite the later chronologers, among whom the belief ix 
the antiquity of Orpheus was universal; he was commonly described as son 
of the Muse Calliopé. Androtién seems to have denied that he was a 
Thracian, regarding the Thracians as incurably stupid and illiterate. Andro 
tidn, Fragm. 36, ed. Didot. phorus treated him as having been a pupil of 
tke Idwan Dactyls of Phrygia (see Diodér. v. 64), and as having learnt 
from them his te2eTa¢ and pvotypia, which he was the first to introduce 
into Greece. The earliest mention which we find <¢ Orpheus, is that of the 
poet Ibycus (about B. ¢. 530), dvozaxavrov ’Opgjv. Thyci Fragm. 9, p. 343, 
ed. Schneidewin. 


22 HISTORY CF GREECE. 


compositions which passed under these names emanate for the 
most part from poets of the Alexandrine age, and subsequent to 
the Christian era; and that even the earliest among them, which 
served as the stock on which the later additions were engrafted, 
belong to a period far more recent than Hesiod; probably to the 
century preceding Onomakritus (8. 0. 610-510). It seems, how- 
ever, certain, that both Orpheus and Muszus were names of 
established reputation at the time when Onomakritus flourished ; 
and it is distinctly stated by Pausanias that the latter was him- 
self the author of the most remarkable and characteristic mythe 
of the Orphic Theogony—the discerption of Zagreus by the 
Titans, and his resurrection as Dionysos.1 

The names of Orpheus and Muszus (as well as that of Pytha- 
goras,? looking at one side of his character) represent facts of 
importance in the history of the Grecian mind—the gradual 
influx of Thracian, Phrygian, and Egyptian, religious ceremonies 
and feelings, and the increasing diffusion of special mysteries,* 





1 Pausan. viii. 37, 3. Titdvag dé mpGrov é¢ moinow éonyayev “Opnpos, Sede 
elvat odac b7d TH KaAovpévw Taptapw: Kal oti év ‘Hpac dpxw ra try rapa 
52 ‘Ounpov ’Ovopaxpitoc, maparaBov tov Titavev td dvowa, Atoviow Te 
ouvédnkev bpyta, kai elvat tode Titavac TH Atovicw Tév madnuarov érotnoerv 
avroupyov¢. Both the date, the character and the function of Onomakritus 
are distinctly marked by Herodotus, vii. 6. 

* Herodotus believed in the derivation both of the Orphic and Pythagorean 
regulations from Egypt — duodoyéovar dé rata roiot Opdixoior Kadeomévotoe 
kal Baxytxoiot, éovot dé Aiyuvrriow (ii. 81). He knows the names of those 
Greeks who have borrowed from Egypt the doctrine of the metempsychosis, 
but he will not mention them (ii. 123): he can hardly allude to any one but 
the Pythagoreans, many of whom he probably knew in Italy. See the 
curious extract from Xenophanés respecting the doctrine of Pythagoras, 
Diogen. Laért. viii. 37 ; and the quotation from the Silli of Tim6n, Ivia- 
yopav d& yoRtog adxokdivayr’ éxt ddgav, ete. Compare Porphyr. in Vit, 
Pythag. ec, 41. 

3 Aristophan. Ran. 1030.— 


’Opdede piv yap terxerac ¥ juiv xaréderte, ddvur 1’ aréxeoSat* 
Movoaioc 7’, &axéoete Te voowy Kal xpnopotc > “Hoiodoc dé, 

Tic épyaciac, kaprav dpac, dpétove: 6 8 eiog “Ounpog 

"An® rod tinny Kal KAéoc Ecyev, mARY Todd’, Ste xpHor’ edidcoxer, . 
*Aperac, Tafetc, OmAicetc avdpOv; ete. 


The same general contrast is to be found in Plato, Protagoras, p. 316; the 
opinion of Pausanias, ix. 30,4. The poems of Museus seem to have borne 


MYSTIC RITES AND FRATERNITIES. 23 


schemes for religious purification, and orgies (I venture to angli- 
cize the Greek word, which contains in its original meaning no 
implication of the ideas of excess to which it was afterwards 
diverted) in honor of some particular god — distinct both from 
the public solemnities and from the gentile solemnities of primi- 
tive Greece, —celebrated apart from the citizens generally, and 
approachable only through a certain course of preparation and 
initiation — sometimes even forbidden to be talked of in the 
presence of the uninitiated, under the severest threats of divine 
judgment. Occasionally such voluntary combinations assumed 
the form of permanent brotherhoods, bound together by periodical 
solemnities as well as by vows of an ascetic character: thus the 
Orphic life (as it was called) or regulation of the Orphic brother- 
hood, among other injunctions partly arbitrary and partly absti- 
nent, forbade animal food universally, and on certain occasions, 
the use of woollen clothing.! The great religious and _ political 
fraternity of the Pythagoreans, which acted so powerfully on the 
condition of the Italian cities, was one of the many manifestations 
of this general tendency, which stands in striking contrast with 
the simple, open-hearted, and demonstrative worship of the 
Homeric Greeks. 

Festivals at seed-time and harvest — at the vintage and at the 
opening of the new wine — were doubtless coeval with the earli- 
est habits of the Greeks; the latter being a period of unusual 
joviality. Yet in the Homeric poems, Dionysos and Démétér, 
the patrons of the vineyard and the cornfield, are seldom men- 
tioned, and decidedly occupy little place in the imagination of the 
poet as compared with the other gods: nor are they of any con- 
spicuous importance even in the Hesiodic Theogony. But during 
the interval between Hesiod and Onomakritus, the revolution in 
the religious mind of Greece was such as to place both these 
deities in the front rank. According to the Orphic doctrine, 
Zagreus, son of Persephoné, is destined to be the successor of 
Zeus, and although the violence of the Titans intercepts this lot, 





considerable analogy to the Melampodia ascribed to Hesiod (see Clemen. 
Alex. Str. vi. p. 628); and healing charms are ascribed to Orpheus as well 
as to Muszeus. See Eurip. Alcestis, 986. 

' Herod. ii. 81; Euripid. Hippol. 957, and the curious fragment of the lost 
Keereg of Euripides. ’Opdsxot Biot, Plato, Legg. vii. 782. 


24 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


yet even when he rises again from his discerption under the 
name of Dionysos, he is the colleague and coéqual of his divin 
father. - car 
This remarkable change, occurring as it did during the sixth 
and a part of the seventh century before the Christian ara, may 
be traced to the influence of communication with Egypt (which 
only became fully open to the Greeks about B. c. 660), as well 
as with Thrace, Phrygia, and Lydia. From hence new religious 
ideas and feelings were introduced, which chiefly attached them- 
selves to the characters of Dionysos and Démétér. ' The Greeks 
identified these two deities with the great Egyptian Osiris and 
Isis, so that what was borrowed from the Egyptian worship of 
the two latter naturally fell to their equivalents in the Grecian 
system.! Moreover the worship of Dionysos (under what name 
cannot be certainly made out) was indigenous in Thrace,? 
as that of the Great Mother was in Phyrgia, and in Lydia — 
together with those violent ecstasies and manifestations of tem- 
porary frenzy, and that clashing of noisy instruments, which we 
find afterwards characterizing it in Greece. The great masters 
of the pipe—as well as the dythyramb,3 and indeed the whole 
musical system appropriated to the worship of Dionysos, which 





1 Herodot. ii. 42, 59, 144. 

2 Herodot. v. 7, vii. 111; Euripid. Hecub. 1249, and Rhésus, 969. and the 
Prologue to the Bacchx; Strabo, x. p.470; Schol. ad Aristophan, Aves, 
874; Eustath. ad Dionys. Perieg. 1069; Harpocrat. v. =@$o¢ Photius, 
Evot YaPoi.~ The “Lydiaca” of Th. Menke (Berlin, 1843) traces the 
early connection between the religion of Dionysos and that of Cybelé, c. 6, 
7. Hoeckh’s Kréta (yol. i. p. 128-134) is instructive respecting the Phrygian 
religion. 

3 Aristotle, Polit. viii. 7,9. Tdca yap Baxyeca xal raéoa @ Tovabry Kivyoic 
uadora tov dpyavav gotiv ev Toi¢ abdoic: Tav 0 dppoviwy év Toig Ppvytor? 
uédeot AauBaver Taita Td Tpérov, olov 6 dLIbpauBog dDoKet OpodoyovuEevax 
rivat ®pbytov. Eurip. Bacch. 58.— 


Alpeaode tamiyopv év rbAEL Ppvyav 
Tiurava, ‘Péac te pntpdc tua & ebphpuara, ete. 


Plutarch, Ei.in Delph. c. 9; Philochor. Fr. 21, ed. Didot, p. 389. The com- A 
plete and intimate manner in which Euripidés identifies the Bacchic rites of 
Dionysos with the Phrygian ceremonies in honor of the Great Mother, is very 
remarkabls, The fine description given by Lucretius (ii. 600-640) of the 
Phrygian ~orship is much enfeebled by his unsatisfactory allegorizing 


POST-HOMERIC CHANGES IN RELIGION. 25 


contrasted so pointedly with the quiet solemnity of the Pxan 
addressed to Apollo — were all originally Phrygian. 

From all these various countries, novelties, unknown to the 
Homeric men, found their way into the Grecian worship: and 
there is one amongst them which deserves to be specially noticed, 
because it marks the generation of the new class of ideas in 
their theology. Homer mentions many persons guilty of private 
or involuntary homicide, and compelled either to go into exile or 
to make pecuniary satisfaction ; but he never once describes any 
of them to have either received or required purification for the 
crime.! Now in the time subsequent to Homer, purification for 
homicide comes to be considered as indispensable: the guilty 
person is regarded as unfit for the society of man or the worship 
of the gods until he has received it, and special ceremonies are 
prescribed whereby it is to be administered. Herodotus tells us 
that the ceremony of purification was the same among the Lydi- 
ans and among the Greeks 2 we know that it formed no part of 
the early religion of the latter, and we may perhaps reasonably 
suspect that they borrowed it from the former. The oldest 
instance known to us of expiation for homicide was contained in 
the epic poem of the Milesian Arktinus,3 wherein Achillés is 





1 Schol. ad Iliad, xi. 690 —od dia rd Kadapora ‘Iditov mopSeirat } Mbdog, 
éret Tor ’Odvacede peilwv Néoropoc, cat rap’ ‘Ouipy odx oldayev govéa Ka- 
Saipopevov, GAN dvritivovta 7} dvyadevduevov, The examples are numer- 
ous, and are found both in the Iliad and the Odyssey. Iliad, ii. 665 ( 7/épo- 
lemos); xiii. 697 (Medén); xiii. 574 (Kpeigeus); xxiii. 89 (Patroclos); 
Odyss. xv. 224 (Theoclymenos) ; xiv. 380 (an 4£tolian). Nor does the inter- 
esting mythe respecting the functions of Até and the Lite harmonize with 
the subsequent doctrine about the necessity of purification. (Iliad, ix. 498). 

* Herodot. i. 85 — éore 0&8 maparAnoin 7 KaSapore Toict Avdoiot Kal Toict 
“EAAqjot. One remarkable proof, amongst many, of the deep hold which 
this idea took of the greatest minds in Greece, that serious mischief would 
fall upon the community if family quarrels or homicide remained without 
religious expiation, is to be found in the objections which Aristotle urges 
against the community of women proposed in the Platonic Republic. It 
could not be known what individuals stood in the relation of father, son or 
brother: if, therefore, wrong or murder of kindred should take place, the 
appropriate religious atonements (ai vouComevar Adcerc) could not be applied, 
and the crime would go unexpiated. (Aristot. Polit. ii. 1,14. Compare 
Thucyd. i. 125-128). 

3 See the Fragm. of the Aithiopis of Arktinus, in Dantzer’s Collection, p. 16. 

VOL. 1. , 2 


26 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


purified by Odysseus for the murder of Thersités: several others 
occurred in the later or Hesiodic epic—Heéraklés, Péleus, Belle- 
rophén, Alkmexén, Amphiktyén, Poemander, Triopas, —from 
whence they probably passed through the hands of the logogra 
phers to Apollodérus, Diodorus, and others.! The purification 
of the murderer was originally operated, not by the hands of any 
priest or specially sanctified man, but by those of a chief or king, 
who goes through the appropriate ceremonies in the manner 
recounted by Herodotus in his pathetic narrative respecting 
Croesus and Adrastus. 

The idea of a special taint of crime, and of the necessity as 
well as the sufficiency of prescribed religious ceremonies as a 
means of removing it, appears thus to have got footing in Grecian 
practice subsequent to the time of Homer. The peculiar rites 
or orgies, composed or put together by Onomakritus, Methapus? 
and other men of more than the ordinary piety, were founded 
upon a similar mode of thinking,and adapted to the same mental 
exigencies. They were voluntary religious manifestations, super- 
induced upon the old public sacrifices of the king or chiefs on 
behalf of the whole society, and of the father on his own family 
hearth — they marked out the details of divine service proper to 
appease or gratify the god to whom they were addressed, and to 
procure for the believers who went through them his blessings 
and protection here or hereafter — the exact performance of the 
divine service in all its specialty was held necessary, and thus the 
priests or Hierophants, who alone were familiar with the ritual, 
acquired a commanding position. Generally speaking, these 





1 The references for this are collected in Lobeck’s Aglaophamos. Epi- 
metr. ii. ad Orphica, p. 968. 

? Pausanias (iv. 1,5) —perexdounoe yap Kat Médarog tig tedetijg (the 
Eleusinian Orgies, carried by Kaukon from Eleusis into Messénia), éorev 4. 
'O d8 MéParoc yévoc uév hv ’AYnvaiog, TeAeTi¢ Te Kal Opyiwv TavTotav 
‘ ovvdétne. Again, viii. 37,3, Onomakritus Avovicw cvvéd nk ev bpyia, 
etc. This is another expression designating the same idea as the Rhésus of 
Euripidés, 944. — . 

Mvornpiov re tov droppnrov davac 
"Ederfev ’Opdedvc. 


a 
G 


* Télinés, the ancestor of the Syracusan despot Gelé, acquired great 
political power as possessing ra ipo, Trav yVoviov Bedy (Hercdot. vii 153); 


PRIESTS, PROPHETS, NEW CEREMONIAL, ETC. 27 


peculiar orgies obtained their admission and their influence at 
periods of distress, disease, public calamity and danger, or re- 
ligious terror and despondency, which appear to have been but 
too frequent in their occurrence. 

The minds of men were prone to the belief that what they 
were suffering arose from the displeasure of some of the gods, 
and as they found that the ordinary sacrifices and worship were 
insufficient for their protection, so they grasped at new sugges- 
tions proposed to them with the view of regaining the divine 
favor... Such suggestions were more usually copied, either in 
whole or in part, from the religious rites of some foreign locality, 
or from some other portion of the Hellenic world; and in this 
manner many new sects or voluntary religious fraternities, prom- 
ising to relieve the troubled conscience and to reconcile the sick 
or suffering with the offended gods, acquired permanent establish- 
ment as well as considerable influence. They were generally 
under the superintendence of hereditary families of priests, who 
imparted the rites of confirmation and purification to communi- 
cants generally ; no one who went through the prescribed cere- 
monies being excluded. In many cases, such ceremonies fell into 
the hands of jugglers, who volunteered their services to wealthy 
men, and degraded their profession as well by obtrusive venality 
as by extravagant promises :2 sometimes the price was lowered. 





he and his family became hereditary Hierophants of these ceremonies. How 
Télinés acquired the /p2 Herodotus cannot say —dévev d2 aird Eafe, } 
abto¢ éxtioato, todto ok éxyw eixat. Probably there was a traditional 
legend, not inferior in sanctity to that of Eleusis, tracing them to the gift of 
Démétér herself. 

1 See Josephus cont. Apion. ii. c. 35.; Hesyck. Ocot Sévi0z; Strabo, x. p 
471; Plutarch, ep? Aecordacpov. c. iii. p. 166; ¢. vii. p. 167. 

2 Plato, Republ. ii. p. 364; Demosthen. de Corona, c. 79, p. 313. The 
decowdaiuwv of Theophrastus cannot be comfortable without receiving the 
Orphic communion monthly from the Orpheoteleste (Theophr. Char. xvi). 
Compare Plutarch, Iep? rod wu ypav Eupertpa, ete., c. 25, p. 400. The comic 
writer Phrynichus indicates the existence of these rites of religious excite- 
ment, at Athens, during the Peloponnesian war. See the short fragment of 
his Kpévoc, ap. Schol. Aristoph. Aves, 989 - 


‘Avhp yopeber, kat Ta Tod Geod KadGe- 
Bota Atoretdn petadpayo Kat royrava ; 


Diopeithés was a ypysudAoyoc, or collecter and delivyerer of prophecies, 


7 


28 HISTORY OF GREECE, 


to bring them within reach of the poor and even of slaves. But 
the wide diffusion, and the number of voluntary communicants 
of these solemnities, proves how much they fell in with the feel- 
ing of the time and how much respect they enjoyed —a respect, 
which the more conspicuous establishments, such as Eleusis and 
Samothrace, maintained for several centuries. And the visit of 
the Kretan Epimenidés to Athens —in the time of Solén, and 
at a season of the most serious disquietude and dread of having 
offended the gods — illustrates the tranquillizing effect of new 
orgies! and rites of absolution, when enjoined by a man standing 
high in the favor of the gods and reputed to be the son of a 
nymph. The supposed Erythrzan Sibyl, and the earliest collec- 
tion of Sibylline prophecies,? afterwards so much multiplied and 
interpolated, and referred (according to Grecian custom) to an 
age even earlier than Homer, appear to belong to a date not long 
posterior to Epimenidés. Other oracular verses, such as those of 
Bakis, were treasured up in Athens and other cities: the sixth 
century before the Christian «ra was fertile in these kinds of 
religious manifestations. 

Amongst the special rites and orgies of the character just 
described, those which enjoyed the greatest Pan-Hellenic reputa- 
tion were attached to the Idean Zeus in Kréte, to Démétér at 
Eleusis, to the Kabeiri in Samothrace, and to Dionysos at Delphi 





which he sung (or rather, perhaps, recited) with solemnity and emphasis, in 
public. Gore motobvtes ypyopode abrot Arddao' gery Atoretder TH mapapat- 
vouévy. (Ameipsias ap. Schol. Aristophan. ut sup., which illustrates 
Thucyd. ii. 21). 

! Plutarch, Sol6n, c. 12; Diogen. Laért. i. 110. 

? See Klausen, “ AEneas und die Penaten:” his chapter on the connection 
between the Grecian and Roman Sibylline collections is among the most 
ingenious of’ his learned book. Book ii. pp. 210-240; see Steph. Byz. v 
Dépyee. 

To the same age belong the ypyopot and xaSappyot of Abaris and his mar 
vellous journey through the air upon an arrow (Herodot. iv. 36). 

Epimenidés also composed xa¥appyot in epic verse; his Kovpyrov and 
KopuBavtwv yéveotc, and his four thousand verses respecting Minds and 
Rhadamanthys, if they had been preserved, would let us fully into the ideas 
of a religious mystic of that age respecting the antiquities of Greece. 
(Strabo, x. p. 474; Diogen. Laért.i. 10). Among the poems ascribed to 
Hesiod were comprised not only the Melampodia, but also éy pavricd and 
tinygjoeic éxt réoaoiv. Pausan. ix. 31, 4. 


INFLUENCE OF EXTRA-HELLENIC RELIGION. 29 


and Thebes.! That they were all to a great degree analovous, 
is shown by the way in which they unconsciously run together 
and become confused in the minds of various authors: the an- 
cient inquirers themselves were unable to distinguish one from 
the other, and we must be content to submit to the like ignorance. 
But we see enough to satisfy us of the general fact, that during 
the century and a half which elapsed between the opening of 
Egypt to the Greeks and the commencement of their struggle 
with the Persian kings, the old religion was largely adulterated 
by importations from Egypt, Asia Minor,? and Thrace. The 
rites grew to be more furious and ecstatic, exhibiting the utmost 
excitement, bodily as well.as mental: the legends became at once 
more coarse, more tragical, and less pathetic. The manifestations 
of this frenzy were strongest among the women, whose religious 
susceptibilities were often found extremely unmanageable,’ and 
who had everywhere congregative occasional ceremonies of their 
own, part from the men — indeed, in the case of the colonists, 
especially of the Asiatic colonists, the women had been originally 
women of the country, and as such retained to a great degree 
their non-Hellenic manners and feelings The god Diony- 





? Among other illustrations of this general resemblance, may be counted 
an epitaph of Kallimachus upon an aged priestess, who passed from the 
service of Démétér to that of the Kabeiri, then to that of Cybelé, having 
the superintendence of many young women. Kallimachus, Epigram. 42. p. 
308. ed. Ernest. 

® Plutarch, (Defect. Oracul. c. 10, p. 415) treats these countries as the orig- 
inal seat of the worship of Demons (wholly or partially bad; and interme- 
diate between gods and men), and their religious ceremonies as of a corres- 
ponding character: the Greeks were borrowers from them, according to him, 
both of the doctrine and of the ceremonies. 

3 Strabo, vii. p.297. “Amavre¢ yap rig devordatpoviac dpynyode olovra: Tag 
yovaixag* abtal dé Kd trode dvdpag mpoKadodvrat é¢ Td én rAgov Separeiag 
tév SeGv, kal éoprac, kal rorviacpotc. Plato (De Legg. x. pp. 909, 910) 
takes great pains to restrain this tendency on the part of sick or suffering 
persons, especially women, to introduce new sacred rites into his city. 

« Herodot.i.146. The wives of the Ionic original settlers at Miletos were 
Karian women, whose husbands they slew. 

The violences of the Karian worship are attested by what Herodotus says 
of the Karian residents in Egypt, at the festival cf Isis at Busiris. The 
Egyptians at this festival manifested their feeling by beating themselves, the 
Karians by cutting their faces with knives (ii. 61). The Kapcx? poica 
became provirbial for funeral wailings (Plata, Legg. vii. p. 800): the un: 


, 


30 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


sos,! whom the legends described as clothed in feminine attire, anda 
leading a troop of .renzied women, inspired a temporary ecstasy, 
and those who resisted the inspiration, being supposed to disobey 
his will, were punished either by particular judgments or by 
mental terrors ; while those who gave full loose to the feeling, in 
the appropriate season and with the received solemnities, satisfied 
his exigencies, and believed themselves to have procured immu- 
nity from such disquietudes for the future.2 Crowds of women, 
clothed with fawn-skins and bearing the sanctified thyrsus, flocked 
to the solitudes of Parnassus, or Kitherén, or Taygetus, during 
the consecrated triennial period, passed the night there with 
torches, and abandoned themselves to demonstrations of frantic 
excitement, with dancing and clamorous invocation of the god: 
they were said to tear animals limb from limb, to devour the raw 





_ measured effusions and demonstrations of sorrow for the departed, some 
times accompanied by cutting and mutilation self-inflicted by the mourner 
was a distinguishing feature in Asiatics and Egyptians as compared with 
Greeks. Plutarch, Consolat. ad Apollon. c. 22, p. 123. Mournful feeling 
was, in fact, a sort of desecration of the genuine and primitive Grecian fes- 
tival, which was a season of cheerful harmony and social enjoyment, where 
in the god was believed to sympathize (eb¢pocivy). See Xenophanés ap. 
Aristot. Rhetor. ii. 25; Xenophan. Fragm. |. ed. Schneidewin; Theognis, 
776; Plutarch, De Superstit. p. 169. The unfavorable comments of Diony 
sius of Halicarnassus, in so far as they refer to the festivals of Greece, apply 
to the foreign corruptions, not to the native character, of Grecian worship, 

1 The Lydian Héraklés was conceived and worshipped as a man in 
female attire: this idea occurs often in the Asiatic religions.. Mencke, 
Lydiaca, c. 8, p. 22. Acévucog appnv nat BiAve. Aristid. Or. iv. p. 28; 
Aischyl. Fragm. Edoni, ap. Aristoph. Thesmoph. 135. Ilodazd¢ 6 yovnns ; 
tic maTpa; Tic  OTOAR ; 

? Melampos cures the women (whom Dionysos has struck mad for their 
resistance to his rites), tapaAaBov rode dvvarwrarove TOV veaviwy pet’ GAa- 
Aaypob Kai tivog évdéov yopeiac. .Apollodér. ii. 2, 7. Compare Eurip 
Bacch. 861. . 

Plato (Legg. vii: p. 790) gives a similar theory of the healing effect of the 
Korybantic rites, which cured vague and inexplicable terrors of the mind by 
means of dancing and music conjoined with religious ceremonies —ai Ta 
tév KopuBavtor layara redovoa (the practitioners were women), al Tov 
éxdpévav Bakyciwv laceic— 7 tov twt_ev Kpatet kivgote mpoobepopevn TH» 
évrd¢ goBepav obcav Kal pavixhv Kkivnow — dpxovpévovg O& Kal abAovpévoe 
ueTa Veiv, olg dv KardAvepqoavtes ExacTot Piwow, KaTeipyaoaro aT uavixds 
guiv dcadéoewr tere Eudpovay Exerv. 


DIONYSIA, KORYBANTES, ETC. 3i 


flesh, and to cut themselves without feeling the wound.! The 
men yielded to a similar impulse by noisy revels in the streets, 
sounding the cymbals and tambourine, and carrying the image of 
the god in procession.2 It deserves to be remarked, that the 
Athenian women never practised these periodical mountain excur- 
sions, so common among the rest of the Greeks: they had their 
feminine solemnities of the Thesmophoria,? mournful in their 
character and accompanied with fasting, and their separate con- 
gregations at the temples of Aphrodité, but without any extreme 
or unseemly demonstrations. The state festival of the Dyonysia, 
in the city of Athens, was celebrated with dramatic entertain- 
ments, and the once rich harvest of Athenian tragedy and comedy 
was thrown up under its auspices. ‘The ceremonies of the Kuré- 
tes in Kréte, originally armed dances in honor of the Idean Zeus, 
seem-also to have borrowed from Asia so much of fury, of self- 
infliction, and of mysticism, that they became at last inextricably 
confounded with the Phrygian Korybantes or worshippers of the 
Great Mother; though it appears that Grecian reserve always 
stopped short of the irreparable self-mutilation of Atys. 

The influence of the Thracian religion upon that of the Greeks 
cannot be traced in detail, but the ceremonies contained in it were 
of a violent and fierce character, like the Phrygian, and acted 
upon Hellas in the same general direction as the latter. And the 
like may be said of the Egyptian religion, which was in this case 
the more operative, inasmuch as all the intellectual Greeks were 
naturally attracted to go and visit the wonders on the banks of the 





1 Described in the Bacchew of Euripidés (140, 735, 1135, etc.). Ovid, 
Trist. iv. i.41. “Utque suum Bacchis non sentit saucia vulnus, Cum furit 
Edonis exululata jugis.” In a fragment of the poet Alkman, a Lydian by birth, 
the Bacchanal nymphs are represented as milking the lioness, and making 
cheese of the milk, during their mountain excursions and festivals. (Alk- 
man. Fragm. 14. Schn. Compare Aristid. Orat. iv. p. 29). Clemens 
Alexand. Admonit. ad Gent. p. 9, Sylb.; Lucian, Dionysos, ¢, 3, T. iii. p. 77, 
Hemsterh. 

? See the tale of Skylés in Herod. iv. 79, and Athenzus, x. p. 445. Hero- 
dotus mentions that the Scythians abhorred the Bacchic ceremonies, account 
ing the frenzy which belonged to them to be disgraceful and monstrous. 

3 Plutarch, De Isid. et Osir. c. 69, p. 378; Schol. ad Aristoph. Thesmoph 
There were however Bacchic ceremonies practised to a certain extent by the 
Athenian women. (Aristoph. Lysist. 388). 


y 


82 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Niie ; the powerful effect produced upon them is attested by nang 
evidences, but especially by the interesting narrative of Herodo- 
tus. Now the Egyptian ceremonies were at once more licentious, 
and more profuse in the outpouring both of joy and sorrow, than 
the Greek :! but a still greater difference sprang from the extra- 
ordinary power, separate mode of life, minute observances, and 
elaborate organization, of the priesthood. The ceremonies of 
Egypt were multitudinous, but the legends concerning them were 
framed by the priests, and as a general rule, seemingly, known to 
the priests alone: at least they were not intended to be publicly 
talked of, even by pious men. They were “holy stories,” which 
it was sacrilege publicly to mention, and which from this very 
prohibition only took firmer hold of the minds of the Greek vis- 
itors who heard them. And thus the element of seerecy and 
mystic silence — foreign to Homer, and only faintly glanced at in 
Hesiod —if it was not originally derived from Egypt, at least 
received from thence its greatest stimulus and diffusion. The 
character of the legends themselves was naturally affected by 
this change from publicity to secrecy : the secrets when revealed 
would be such ‘as to justify by their own tenor the interdict on 
public divulgation: instead of being adapted, like the Homeric 
mythe, to the universal sympathies and hearty interest of a 
crowd of hearers, they would derive their impressiveness from 
the tragical, mournful, extravagant, or terror-striking character 
of the incidents.2_ Such a tendency, which appears explicable 
and probable even on general grounds, was in this particular case 
rendered still more certain by the coarse taste of the Egyptian 
priests. That any recondite doctrine, religious or philosophical, 
was attached to the mysteries or contained in the holy stories, 





'« /Egyptiaca numina fere plangoribus gaudent, Greeca plerumque chor 
eis, barbara autem strepitu cymbalistarum et tympanistarum et choraula- 
rum.” (Apuleius, De Genio Socratis, v. ii. p. 149, Oudend). 

* The legend of Dionysos and Prosymnos, as it stands in Clemens, could 
never have found place in an epic poem (Admonit. ad Gent. p. 22, Sylb.), 
Compare page 11 of the same work, where however he so confounds together 
Phrygian, Bacchic, and Eleusinian mysteries, that one cannot distinguish 
them apart. 

Demetrius Phaléreus says about the legends belonging to these ceremonies 
— Ato kai ra wvorhpia Aéyerat bv GAAnyopiaig mpd ExmAnNELy Kat ope 
env, orep év oxbTw kai vixtt. (De Interpretatione, c. 101). 


EGYPTIAN AND THRACIAN RELIGION. 34 


has never been shown, and is to the last degree improbanle 
though the affirmative has been asserted by many learned men 

Herodotus seems to have believed that the worship and cere- 
monies of Dionysos generally were derived by the Greeks from . 
Egypt, brought over by Kadmus and taught by him to Melampus: 
and the latter appears in the Hesiodic Catalogue as having cured 
the daughters of Proetus of the mental distemper with which they 
had been smitten by Dionysos for rejecting his ritual. He cured 
them by introducing the Bacchic dance and fanatical excitement : 
this mythical incident is the most ancient mention of the Diony- 
siac solemnities presented in the same character as they bear in 
Euripidés. It is the general tendency of Herodotus to apply the 
theory of derivation from Egypt far too extensively to Grecian 
institutions: the orgies of Dionysos were not originally borrowed 
from thence, though they may have been much modified by con- 
nection with Egypt as well as with Asia. The remarkable mythe 
composed by Onomakritus respecting the dismemberment of 
Zagreus was founded upon an Egyptian tale very similar respect- 
ing the body of Osiris, who was supposed to be identical with — 
Dionysos :! nor was it unsuitable to the reckless fury of the Bac- 
chanals during their state of temporary excitement, which found 
a still more awful expression in the mythe of Pentheus, — torn 
in pieces by his own mother Agavé at the head of her compan- 
ions in the ceremony, as an intruder upon the feminine rites as 
well as a scoffer at the god.? A passage in the Iliad (the authen- 
ticity of which has been contested, but even as an interpolation it 
must be old) also recounts how Lykurgus was struck blind by 
Zeus for having chased away with a whip “ the nurses of the mad 
Dionysos,” and frightened the god himself into the sea to take 





' See the curious treatise of Plutarch, De Isid. et Osirid. c. 11-14, p. 
356, and his elaborate attempt to allegorize the legend. He seems to have 
conceived that the Thracian Orpheus had first introduced into Greece the 
mysteries both of Démétér and Dionysos, copying them from those of Isis 
and Osiris in Egypt. See Fragm. 84, from one of his lost works, tom, v. p 
891, ed. Wyttenb. 

? ZEschylus had dramatized the story of Pentheus as well as that of Ly- 
kurgus: one of his tetralogies was the Lykurgria (Dindorf, sch. Fragm. 
115). Ashort allusion to the story of Pentheus appears in Eumenid. 24 
Compare Sophocl. Antigon. 985, and the Scholia. 

* Tliad, vi. 130. See the remarks of Mr. Payne Knight ad loc. 

VOL. I. 2* 3oc. 


34 HISTORY OF GREECE 


refuge in the arms of Thetis: and the fact, that Dionysos is se 
frequently represented in his mythes as encountering opposition 
and punishing the refractory, seems to indicate that his worship 
under its ecstatic form was a late phenomenon and introduced not 
without difficulty. ‘The mythical Thracian Orpheus was attached 
as Eponymos to a new sect, who seem to have celebrated the cere- 
monies of Dionysos with peculiar care, minuteness and fervor, 
besides observing various rules in respect to food and clothing. 
st was the opinion of Herodotus, that these rules, as well as the 
Pythagorean, were borrowed from Egypt. But whether this be 
the fact or not, the Orphic brotherhood is itself both an evidence, 
and a cause, of the increased importance of the worship of Dion- 
ysos, which indeed is attested by the great dramatic poets of 
Athens. 

The Homeric Hymns present to us, however, the religious 
ideas and legends of the Greeks at an earlier period, when the 
enthusiastic and mystic tendencies had not yet acquired their full 
development. Though not referable to the same age or to the 
same author as either the Iliad or the Odyssey, they do to a cer- 
tain extent continue the same stream of feeling, and the same 
mythical tone and coloring, as these poems — manifesting but 
little evidence of Egyptian, Asiatic, or Thracian adulterations. 
The difference is striking between the god Dionysos as he appears 
in the Homeric hymn and in the Bacche of Euripidés. The 
hymnographer describes him as standing on the sea-shore, in the 
guise of a beautiful and richly-clothed youth, when Tyrrhenian 
pirates suddenly approach: they seize and bind him and drag 
him on board their vessel. But the bonds which they employ 
burst spontaneously, and leave the god free. ‘The steersman, per- 
ceiving this with affright, points out to his companions that they 
have unwittingly laid hands on a god, — perhaps Zeus himself, 
or Apollo, or Poseidén. He conjures them to desist, and to re- 
place Dionysos respectfully on the shore, lest in his wrath he 
should visit the ship with wind and hurricane: but the crew de- 
ride his scruples, and Dionysos is carried prisoner out to sea with 
the ship under full sail. Miraculous circumstances soon attest 
both his presence and his power. Sweet-scented wine is seen to 
flow spontaneously about the ship, ¢he sail and mast appear 
adorned with vine and ivy-leaves, and the oar-pegs with garlands 


HOMERIC HYMN TO DIONYSOS. 35 


Lhe terrified crew now too late entreat the helmsman to steer his 
rourse for the shore, and crowd round him for protection on the 
poop. But their destruction is at hand: Dionysos assumes the 
form of a lion—a bear is seen standing near him—this bear 
rushes with a loud roar upon the captain, while the crew leap 
overboard in their agony of fright, and are changed into dolphins. 
Ther? remains none but the discreet and pious steersman, to whom 
Dionysos addresses words of affectionate encouragement, reveal- 
ing his name, parentage and dignity.! 

This hymn, perhaps produced at the Naxian festival of Dion- 
ysos, and earlier than the time when the dithyrambic chorus be- 
came the established mode of singing the praise and glory of that 
god, is conceived in a spirit totally different from that of the Bac- 
chic Telatz, or special rites which the Bacche of Euripidés so 
abundantly extol,— rites introduced from Asia by Dionysos him- 
self at the head of a thiasus or troop of enthusiastic women,— in- 
flaming with temporary frenzy the minds of the women of Thebes, 
—not communicable except to those who approach as pious com- 
municants,— and followed by the most tragical results to all those 
who fight against the god.2 The Bacchic Telete, and the Bac- 
chic feminine frenzy, were importations from abroad, as Euripides 
represents them, engrafted upon the joviality of the primitive 
Greek Dionysia; they were borrowed, in all probability, from 
more than one source and introduced through more than one 





1 See Homer, Hymn 5, Acévucoc } Ajarat. — The satirical drama of Euri- 
pidés, the Cyclops, extends and alters this old legend. Dionysos is carried 
away by the Tyrrhenian pirates, and Silénus at the head of the Bacchanals 
goes everywhere in search of him (Eur. Cyc. 112). ‘The pirates are instiga- 
ted against him by the hatred of Héré, which appears frequently as a cause 
of mischief to Dionysos (Bacchx, 286). Héré in her anger had driven him 
mad when a child, and he had wandered in this state over Egypt and Syria; 
at length he came to Cybela in Phrygia, was purified (kadap8elc) by Rhea, 
and received from her female attire (Apollod6r. iii. 5, 1, with Heyne’s note). 
This seems to have been the legend adopted to explain the old verse of the 
Iliad, as well as the maddening attributes of the god generally. 

There was a standing antipathy between the priestesses and the religious 
establishments of Héré and Dionysos (Plutarch, Ilep? tov é TAaraiace 
Aaidadawy, c. 2, tom. v. p. 755, ed. Wytt.). Plutarch ridicules the legendary 
reason commonly assigned for this, and provides a symbolical explanatior 
which he thinks very satisfactory. 

* Eurip. Bacch. 325, 464, ete. 


28 HISTORY OF GREECE, 


channel, the Orphic life or brotherhood being one of the varieties, 
Strabo ascribes to this latter a Thracian original, considering Or. 
pheus, Muszeus, and Eumolpus as having been all Thracians.!_ It 
is curious to observe how, in the Bacchez of Euripidés, the two 
distinct and even conflicting ideas of Dionysos come alternately 
forward; sometimes the old Grecian idea of the jolly and exhil- 
arating god of wine—but more frequently the recent and import- 
ed idea of the terrific and irresistible god who unseats the reason, 
and whose @strus can only be appeased by a willing, though tem- 
porary obedience. In the fanatical impulse which inspired the 
votaries of the Asiatic Rhea or Cybelé, or of the Thracian Kotys, 
there was nothing of spontaneous joy; it was a sacred madness, 
during which the soul appeared to be surrendered to a stimulus 
from without, and accompanied by preternatural strength and tem- 
porary sense of power,? — altogether distinct from the unrestrain- 
ed hilarity of the original Dionysia, as we see them in the rural 
demes of Attica, or in the gay city of Tarentum. There was 
indeed a side on which the two bore some analogy, inasmuch as, 





1 Strabo, x. p. 471. Compare Aristid. Or. iy. p. 28. 

2 In the lost Xantrie of /schylus, in which seems to have been included 
the tale of Pentheus, the goddess Aioca was introduced, stimulating the Bac- 
chs, and creating in them spasmodic excitement from head to foot: é« 7a- 
dav & dva ‘Yrépyerar onapaypre cig dxpov xapa, ete. (Fragm. 155, Dindorf), 
His tragedy called dont also gave a terrific representation of the Bacchan- 
als and their fury, exaggerated by the maddening music: [liumAgoz pédog, 
Maviag éraywydv duoxia (Fr. 54). 

Such also is the reigning sentiment throughout the greater part of the 
Bacchex of Euripidés; it is brought out still more impressively in the mourn- 
ful Atys of Catullus :— 

“ Dea magna, Dea Cybele, Dindymi Dea, Domina, 
Procul a med tuus sit furor omnis, hera, domo: 
Alios age incitatos : alios age rabidos!” 

We have only to compare this fearful influence with the description of 
Dikeopolis and his exuberant joviality in the festival of the rural Dionysia 
(Aristoph. Acharn. 1051 seg.; see also Plato. Legg. i. p. 637), to see how com 
pletely the foreign innovations recolored the old Grecian Dionysos, — Arép- 
voog roAvyndjc,—- who appears also in the scene of Dionysos and Ariadné 
in the Symposion of Xenoph6n, c. 9. The simplicity of the ancient Diony- 
siac processions is dwelt upon by Plutarch, De Cupidine Divitiarum, p. 527; 
and the original dithyram» addressed by Archilochus to Dionysres is an 
effusion of drunken hilarity ;Archiloch. Frag. 69, Schneid.), 


DIFFERENCES IN THE WORSHIP OF DIONYSOs. 37 


according to the religious point of view of the Greeks, even the 
spontaneous joy of the vintage feast was’ conferred by the favor 
and enlivened by the companionship of Dionysos. It was upon 
this analogy that the framers of the Bacchic orgies proceeded 

but they did not the less disfigure the genuine character of the 
old Grecian Dionysia. 

Dionysos is in the conception of Pindar the Paredros or com- 
panion in worship of Démétér:! the worship and religious esti- 
mate of the latter has by that time undergone as great a change 
as that of the former, if we take our comparison with the brief 
description of Homer and Hesiod: she has acquired 2 much of the 
awful and soul-disturbing attributes of the Phrygian Cybelé. In 
Homer, Démétér is the goddess of the corn-field, who becomes 
attached to the mortal man Jasién; an unhappy passion, since 
Zeus, jealous of the connection between goddesses and men, puts 
him to death. In the Hesiodic Theogony, Démétér is the mother 
of Persephoné by Zeus, who permits Hadeés to carry off the latter 
as his wife: moreover Démétér has, besides, by Jasién a son call- 
ed Plutos, born in Kréte. Even from Homer to Hesiod, the 
legend of Démétér,has been expanded and her dignity exalted ; 
according to the usual tendency of Greek legend, the expansion 
goes on still further. Through Jasién, Démétér becomes connect- 
ed with the mysteries of Samothrace ;- through Persephoné, with 
those of Eleusis. The former connection it is difficult to follow 
out in detail, but the latter is explained and traced to its origin in 
the Homeric Hymn to Démétér. 





1 Pindar, Isthm. vi. 8. yatKoxpstrov rapedpov Anuntepoc, —the epithet 
marks the approximation of Démétér to the Mother of the Gods. 7 xporaAov 
turavev 7 lay, civ te Bpdouo¢ abAdv Evadev (Homer. Hymn. xiii.), —the 
Mother of the Gods was worshipped by Pindar himself along with Pan; she 
had in his time her temple and ceremonies at Thébes (Pyth. iii. 78; Fragm. 
Dithyr. 5, and the Scholia ad J.) as well as, probably, at Athens (Pausan. i. 
3,3). 

Dionysos and Démétér are also brought together in the chorus of Sopho- 
klés, Antigoné, 1072. zéderg 6? mayKoivore "EAevorviag Anoi¢ év xédArotc; 
and in Kallimachus, Hymn. @erer. 70. Bacchus or Dionysos are in the Attic 
tragedians constantly confounded with the Démétrian Iacchos, originally so 
different, —a personification of the mystic word shouted by the Eleusinian 
communicants. See Strabo, x. p, 468. 

2 Euripidés in his Chorus in the Helena (1320 seq.) assigns to Démétér ali 
the attributes of Rhea, and blends the two comoletely into one. 


38 HISTORY OF GREECE 


Though we find different statements respecting the date as 
well as the origin of the Eleusinian mysteries, yet the popular 
belief of the Athenians, and the story which found favor at Eleu- 
sis, ascribed them to the presence and dictation of the goddess 
Démétér herself; just as the Bacchic rites are, according to the 
Bacche of Euripidés, first communicated and enforced on the 
Greeks by the personal visit of Dionysos to Thébes, the metro- 
polis of the Bacchic ceremonies.! - In the Eleusinian legend, pre- 
served by the author of the Homeric Hymn, she comes yolun- 
tarily and- identifies herself with Eleusis; her past abode in 
Kréte being briefly indicated.2 Her visit to Eleusis is connected 
with the deep sorrow caused by the loss of her daughter Perse- 
phoné, who had been seized by Hadés, while gathering flowers 
in a meadow along with the Oceanic Nymphs, and carried off 
to become his wife in the under-world. In vain did the reluctant 
Persephoné shriek and invoke the aid of her father Zeus: he had 
consented to give her to Hadés, and her cries were heard only by 
Hekaté and Hélios. Démétér was inconsolable at the disappear- 
ance of her daughter, but knew not where to look for her: she 
wandered for nine days and nights with torches in search of the 
lost maiden without success. At length Helios, the “spy of gods 
and men,” revealed to her, in reply to her urgent prayer, the 
rape of Persephoné, and the permission given to Hadés by Zeus. 
Démétér was smitten with anger and despair: she renounced Zeus 
and the society of Olympus, abstained from nectar and ambro- 
sia, and wandered on earth in grief and fasting until her form 
could no longer be known. In this condition shecameto Eleusis, 
then governed by the prince Keleos. Sitting down by a well at 
the wayside in the guise of an old woman, she was found by the 
daughters of Keleos, who came hither with their pails of brass 
for water. In reply to their questions, she told them that she had 
been brought by pirates from Kréte to Thorikos, and had made 
her escape; she then solicited from them succor and employment 
as a servant or as anurse. The damsels prevailed upon their 
mother Metaneira to receive her, and to entrust her with the 





1 Sophoel. Antizon. Baxydv untpéroAw O7Bav. 
® Homer, Hymn. Cerer. 123. The Hymn to Démétér has been translated, 
accompanied with valuable illustrative notes, by J. H. Voss (Heidelb. 1826) 


HOMERIC HYMN TO DEMETER. 39 


nursing of the young Démophodn, their late-born brother, the 
only son of Keleos. Démétér was received into the house of 
Metaneira, her dignified form still borne down by grief: she sat 
long silent and could not be induced either to smile or to taste 
food, until the maid-servant Iambé, by jests and playfulness, sue- 
ceeded in amusing and rendering her cheerful. She would not 
taste wine, but requested a peculiar mixture of barley-meal with 
water and the herb mint.! 

The child Démophoon, nursed by Démétér, throve and grew 
up like a god, to the delight and astonishment of his parents: she 
gave him no food, but anointed him daily with ambrosia, and 
plunged him at night in the fire like a torch, where he remained 
unburnt. She would have rendered him immortal, had she not 
been prevented by the indiscreet curiosity and alarm of Meta- 
neira, who secretly looked in at night, and shrieked with horror at 
the sight of her child in the fire? The indignant goddess, setting 
the infant on the ground, now revealed her true character to 
Metaneira: her wan and aged look disappeared, and she stood 
confest in the genuine majesty of her divine shape, diffusing a 
dazzling brightness which illuminated the whole house. “ Foolish 
mother,” she said, “thy want of faith has robbed thy son of im- 
mortal life. I am the exalted Démétér, the charm and comfort 
both of gods and men: I was preparing for thy son exemption 
from death and old age; now it cannot be but he must ‘taste of 
both. Yet shall he be ever honored, since he has sat upon my 
knee and slept in my arms. Let the people of Eleusis erect for 
me a temple and altar on yonder hill above the fountain; I will 
myself prescribe to them the orgies which they must religiously 
perform in order to propitiate my favor.” 





1 Homer, Hymn. Cerer. 202-210. 

2 This story was also told with reference to the Egyptian goddess Isis in 
her wanderings. See Plutarch, De Isid. et Osirid. c. 16, p. 357. 

3 Homer, Hymn. Cerer. 274.— : 

*Opy:a 8 airy tydv broSjooua, O¢ dv erecta 
Etayéac Epdovreg éudv véov iAdoxnove. 

The same story is told in regard to the infant Achilles. His mother Thetis 
was taking similar measures to render him immortal, when his father Peleus 
interfered and rrevented the consummation. Thetis immediately left him 
in great wrath ( Apollon. Rhod. iv. 866). 


’ 


40 HISTORY OF GREECK 


The terrified Metaneira was incapable even of liftmg up her 
child from the ground; her daughters entered at her cries, and 
began to embrace and tend their infant brother, but he sorrowed 
and could not be pacified for the loss of his divine nurse. AJJ 
night they strove to appease the goddess.1 

Strictly executing the injunctions of Démétér, Keleos conyoked 
the people of Eleusis and erected the temple on the spot which 
she had pointed out. It was speedily completed, and Démétér 
took up her abode in it,—apart from the remaining gods, still 
pining with grief for the loss of her daughter, and withholding 
her beneficent aid from mortals. And thus she remained a whole 
year, —a desperate and terrible year:? in vain did the oxen 
draw the plough, and in vain was the barley-seed cast into the 
furrow, — Démétér suffered it not to emerge from the earth. 
The human race would have been starved, and the gods would 
have been deprived of their honors and sacrifice, had not Zeus 
found means to conciliate her. But this was a hard task; for 
Démétér resisted the entreaties of Iris and of all the other god- 
desses and gods whom Zeus successively sent to her. She would 
be satisfied with nothing less than the recovery of her daughter. 
At length Zeus sent Hermés to Hadés, to bring Persephoné 
away: Persephoné joyfully obeyed, but Hadés prevailed upon 
her before she departed to swallow a grain of pomegranate, which 
rendered it impossible for her to remain the whole year away 
from him. (es 

With transport did Démétér receive back her lost daughter, 
and the faithful Hekaté sympathized in the delight felt by both 
at the reunion.4 It was now an easier undertaking to reconcile 
her with the gods. Her mother Rhea, sent down expressly by 
Zeus, descended from Olympus on the fertile Rharan plain, then 
smitten with barrenness like the rest of the earth: she sueceeded 
in appeasing the indignation of Démétér, who consented again ta 





1 Homer, Hymn. 290.— 
tov o ob pecdiocoero Supde, 
Xeiporepar yap d7 pv Eyov rpdgoe Hdé rvIjvat. 
2 Homer, H. Cer. 305.— 
Ailvérarov 0 éviavriv tnt y8va rovAvBérerpav 
Tloina’ avSparoig, iS KivTarov. 
* Hymn, v. 375. 4 Hymn, v. 442 


DEMETER AT ELEUSIS. 4i 


put forth her relieving hand. The buried seed came up in abun- 
dance, and the earth was covered with fruit and flowers. She 
would have wished to retain Persephoné constantly with her, but 
this was impossible; and she was obliged to consent that her 
daughter should go down for one-third of each year to the house 
of Hadés, departing from her every spring at the time when the 
sced is sown. She then revisited Olympus, again to dwell with 
the gods; but before her departure, she communicated to the 
daughters of Keleos, and to Keleos himself, together with Trip- 
tolemus, Dioklés and Eumolpus, the divine service and the so- 
lemnities which she required to be observed in her honor.! And 
thus began the venerable mysteries of Eleusis, at her special com- 
mand: the lesser mysteries, celebrated in February, in honor of 
Persephoné; the greater, in August, to the honor of Démétér 
herself. Both are jointly patronesses of the holy city and 
temple. 

Such is a brief sketch of the temple legend of Eleusis, set 
forth at length in the Homeric Hymn to Démétér. It is interest- 
ing not less as a picture of the Mater Dolorosa (in the mouth of 
an Athenian, Démétér and Persephoné were always the Mother 
and Daughter, by excellence), first an agonized sufferer, and then 
finally glorified,— the weal and*woe of man being dependent 
upon her kindly feeling, — than as an illustration of the nature 
and g~~yth of Grecian legend generally. Though we now read 
this Hymn as pleasing poetry, to the Eleusinians, for whom _ it 
was composed, it was genuine and sacred history. They believ- 
ed in the visit of Démétér to Eleusis, and in the mysteries as a 
revelation from her, as implicitly as they believed in her existence 
and power as a goddess. ‘The Eleusinian psalmist shares this be- 
lief in common with his countrymen, and embodies it in a contin- 
uous narrative, in which the great goddesses of the place, as well 
as the great heroic families, figure in inseparable conjunction 





1 'Hymn, v. 475.— 
‘H 62 kiovoa SeutororéAotc BactAciot 
Acigev, TpinroAéup re, Atoxréi te rAntinay, 
Eipoarov te Bin, Kedéw 8 jyfropt Aaav 
Apyopocbvny lepGy- Kai érédpadey dpyta ratoiy 
IpecBurépys KeAéoro, ete. 


~ 


42 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Keleos is the son of the Eponymous hero Eleusis, and his daugh- 
ters, with the old epic simplicity, carry their basins to the well 
for water. Eumolpus, Triptolemus, Dioklés, heroic ancestors of 
the privileged families who continued throughout the historical 
times of Athens to fulfil their special hereditary functions in the 
Eleusinian solemnities, are among the immediate recipients of in- 
spiration from the goddess; but chiefly does she favor Metaneira 
and her infant son Démophoon, for the latter of whom her great- 
est boon is destined, and intercepted only by the weak faith of 
the mother. Moreover, every incident in the Hymn has a local 
coloring and a special reference. The well, overshadowed by 
an olive-tree near which Démétér had rested, the stream Kalli- 
chorus and the temple-hill, were familiar and interesting places in 
the eyes of every Eleusinian; the peculiar posset prepared from 
barley-meal with mint was always tasted by the Mysts (or com- 
municants) after a prescribed fast, as an article in the ceremony, 
—while it was also the custom, at a particular spot in the pro- 
cessional march, to permit the free interchange of personal jokes 
and taunts upon individuals for the general amusement. And 
these two customs are connected in the Hymn with the incidents, 
that Démétér herself had chosen the posset as the first interrup- 
tion of her long and melancholy fast, and that her sorrowful 
thoughts had been partially diverted by the coarse playfulness of 
the servant-maid Iambé. In the enlarged representation of the 
Eleusinian ceremonies, which became established after the incor- 
peration of Eleusis with Athens, the part of Iambé herself 
was enacted by a woman, or man in woman’s attire, of suitable 
wit and imagination, who was posted on the bridge over the Ke- 
phissos, and addressed to the passers-by in the procession, ! espe- 
cially the great men of Athens, saucy jeers, probably not less 
piercing than those of Aristophanés on the stage. The torch- 
bearing Hekaté received a portion of the worship in the nocturnal 
ceremonies of the Eleusinia: this too is traced, in the Hymn, to 
her kind and affectionate sympathy with the great goddesses, 





1 Aristophanés, Vesp. 1863. Hesych. v. Te@upic. Suidas, v. Tedupifov 
Compare about the details of the ceremony, Clemens Alexandr. Admon. ad 
Gent. p. 13. A similar license of unrestrained jocularity appears in the 
rites of Démétér in Sicily (Diodér. v. 4; see also Pausan. vii. 27, 4), and in 
the worship of Damia and Auxesia at AXgina (Herodot. v. 83). 


CONSECRATION OF ELEUSIS. 43 


- Though all these incidents were sincerely believed by the 
Eleusiniansasatrue history of the past, and as having been the real 
initiatory cause of their own solemnities, it is not the less certain 
that they are simply mythes or legends, and not to be treated as 
history, either actual or exaggerated. They do not take their 
start from realities of the past, but from realities of the present, 
combined with retrospective feeling and fancy, which fills up the 
blank of the aforetime in a manner at once plausible and im- 
pressive. -What proportion of fact there may be in the legend, 
or whether there be any at all, it is impossible to ascertain and 
useless to inquire; for the story did not acquire belief from its 
approximation to real fact, but from its perfect harmony with 
Eleusinian faith and feeling, and from the absence of any standard 
of historical credibility. The little town of Eleusis derived all 
its importance from the solemnity of the Démétria, and the 
Hymn which we have been considering (probably at least as old 
as 600 B. c.) represents the town as it stood before its absorption 
into the larger unity of Athens, which seems to have produced 
_an alteration of its legends and an increase of dignity in its great 
festival. In the faith of an Eleusinian, the religious as well as 
the patriotic antiquities of his native town were connected with 
this capital solemnity. ‘The divine legend of the sufferings of 
Démétér and her visit to Eleusis was to him that which the heroic 
legend of Adrastus and the Siege of Thébes was to a Sikyenian, or 
that of Erechtheus and Athéné to an Athenian grouping together 
in the same scene and story the goddess and the heroic fathers 
of the town. If our information were fuller, we should probably 
find abundance of other legends respecting the Démétria: the 
Gephyri of Athens, to whom belonged the celebrated Harmodi- 
os and Aristogeiton, and who possessed special Orgies of Dé- 
métér the Sorrowful, to which no man foreign to their Gens was 
ever admitted,! would doubtless have told stories not only different 
but contradictory; and even in other Eleusinian mythes we dis- 
cover Eumolpus as king of Eleusis, son of Poseidon, and a 
Thracian, completely different from the character which he bears 
in the Hymn before us.2 Neither discrepancies nor want. of 





1 Herodot, v, 61. 
* Pausan. i. 38,3; Apollod6r. iii. 15,4. Heyne in his Note admits seve 


= 


44 HISTORY OF GREECE 


evidence, in reference to alleged antiquities, sliocked the faith of 
a non-historical public. What they wanted was a picture of the 
past, impressive to their feelings and plausible to their imagina- 
tion; and it is important to the reader to remember, while he 
reads either the divine legends which we are now illustrating or 
the heroic legends to which we shall soon approach, that he is 
dealing with a past which never was present, —a region essen- 
tially mythical, neither approachable by the critic nor mensurable 
by the chronologer. 

The tale respecting the visit of Démétér, which was told by the 
ancient Gens, called the Phytalids,! in reference to another tem- 
ple of Démétér between Athens and Eleusis, and also by the 
Megarians in reference to a Démétrion near their city, acquired 
under the auspices of Athens still further extension. The god- 
dess was reported to have first communicated to Triptolemus at 
Eleusis the art of sowing corn, which by his intervention was 
disseminated all over the earth. And thus the Athenians took 
credit to themselves for having been the medium of communica~ 
tion from the gods to man of all the inestimable blessings of 
agriculture, which they affirmed to have been first exhibited on 
the fertile Rharian plain near Eleusis. Such pretensions are not 
to be found in the old Homeric hymn. The festival of the Thes- 
mophoria, celebrated in honor of Démétér Thesmophoros at 
Athens, was altogether different from the Eleusinia, in this mate- 
rial respect, as well as others, that all males were excluded, and 
women only were allowed to partake in it: the surname Thesmo- 
phorus gave occasion to new legends in which the goddess was 
glorified as the first authoress of laws and legal sanctions to 
mankind.2 This festival, for women apart and alone, was also 





ral persons named Eumolpus. Compare Isokratés, Panegyr. p. 55. Philo- 
chorus the Attic antiquary could not have received the legend of the 
Eleusinian Hymn, from the different account which he gave respecting the 
rape of Persephoné (Philoch. Fragm. 46, ed. Didot), and also pane 
Keleos (Fr. 28, ibid.). 

1 Phytalus, the Eponym or godfather of this gens, had received Demet 
as a guest in his house, when she first presented mankind with the fruit of the 
fig-tree. (Pausan. i. 37, 2.) 

* Kallimach. Hymn. Cerer. 19. Sophoklés, Triptolemos, Frag 1. Cice 
ro, Legg ii. 14, and the note of Servius ad Virgil. Ain. iv. 58. 


HOMERIC HYMN TO APOLLU. 45 


zelebrated at Paros, at Ephesus, and in many other parts of 
Greece.! 

Altogether, Démétér and Dionysos, as the Grecian counter: 
parts of the Egyptian Isis and Osiris, seem to have been the 
great recipients of the new sacred rites borrowed from Egypt, 
before the worship of Isis in her own name was introduced into 
Greece: their solemnities became more frequently recluse and 
mysterious than those of the other deities. The importance of 
Démétér to the collective nationality of Greece may be gathered 
from the fact that her temple was erected at Thermopyle, the 
spot where the Amphiktyonic assemblies were held, close by the 
temple of the Eponymous hero Amphiktyén himself, and under 
the surname of the Amphiktyonic Démétér.2 

We now pass to another and not less important celestial per- 
sonage — Apollo. 

The legends of Délos and Delphi, embodied in the Homeric 
Hymn to Apollo, indicate, if not a greater dignity, at least a more 
widely diffused worship of that god than even of Démétér. The 
Hymn is, in point of fact, an aggregate of two separate com- 
pesitions, one emanating from an Ionic bard at Délos, the other 
from Delphi. The first details the birth, the second the mature 
divine efficiency, of Apollo; but both alike present the unaffected 
charm as well as the characteristic peculiarities of Grecian 
mythical. narrative. ‘The hymnographer sings, and his hearers 
accept in perfect good faith, a history of the past; but it is a past, 
imagined partly as an introductory explanation to the present, 
partly as a means of glorifying the god. The island of Délos 
was the accredited birth-place of Apollo, and is also the place in 
which he chiefly delights, where the great and. brilliant Ionic fes- 
tival is periodically convened in his honor. Yet it is a rock 
uarrow, barren, and uninviting: how came so glorious a privilege 
to be awarded to it? This the poet takes upon himself to 
explain. Lét6, pregnant with Apollo, and persecuted by the 
jealous Héré, could find no spot wherein to give birth to her 
offspring. In vain did she address herself to numerous places in ~ 
Greece, the Asiatic coast and the intermediate islands; all were 





' Hicrodot. vi. 16,134. éoxog Oecpogépov Anuntpoc—-TS é¢ Epoeva yovor 
appyra lepa, 
* Herodot. vii. 200. . 


46 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


terrified at the wrath of Héré, and refused to harbor her. Asa 
last resort, she approached the rejected and repulsive island of 
Délos, and promised that, if shelter were granted to her in her 
forlorn condition, the island should become the chosen resort of 
Apollo as well as the site of his temple with its rich accompanying 
solemnities.! Délos joyfully consented, but not without many 
apprehensions that the potent Apollo would despise her unwor- 
thiness, and not without exacting a formal oath from Lété,—who 
was then admitted to the desired protection, and duly accomplish- 
ed her long and painful labor. Though Didné, Rhea, Themis 
and Amphitrité came to soothe and succor her, yet Héré kept 
away the goddess presiding over childbirth, Eileithyia, and thus 
cruelly prolonged her pangs. At length Eileithyia came, and 
Apollo was born. Hardly had Apollo tasted, from the hands of 
Themis, the immortal food, nectar and ambrosia, when he burst 
at once his infant bands, and displayed himself in full divine form 
and strength, claiming his characteristic attributes of the bow and 
the harp, and his privileged function of announcing beforehand 
to mankind the designs of Zeus. The promise made by Lété 
to Délos was faithfully performed: amidst the numberless other 
temples and groves which men provided for him, he ever prefer- 
red that island as his permanent residence, and there the Ionians 
with their wives and children, and all their “bravery,” congrega- 
ted periodically from their different cities to glorify him. Dance 
and song and athletic contests adorned the solemnity, and the 
countless ships, wealth, and grace of the multitudinous Ionians 
had the air of an assembly of gods. The Delian maidens, ser- 
vants of Apollo, sang hymns to the glory of the god, as well as 
of Artemis and Lété, intermingled with adventures of foregone 
men and women, to the delight of the listening crowd. The blind 
itinerant bard of Chios (composer of this the Homeric hymn, and 
confounded in antiquity with the author of the Iliad) had found 
honor and acceptance at this festival, and commends himself, ina 





1 According to another legend, Lété was said to have been conveyed from 
the Hyperboreans to Délos in twelve days, in the form of a she-wolf, to escape 
the jealous eye of Héré. In connection with this legend, it was affirmed 
that the she-wolves always brought forth their young only during these 
twelve days in the year (Aristot. Hist, Animal. vii. 35). 


DELOS AND DELPHI. 47 


touching farewell strain, to the remembrance and sympathy of 
the Delian maidens.! 

But Délos was not an oracular spot: Apollo did not manifest 
himself there as revealer of the futurities of Zeus. A place 
must be found where this beneficent function, without which man- 
kind would perish under the innumerable doubts and perplexities 
of life, may be exercised and rendered available. Apollo himself 
descends from Olympus to make choice of a suitable site: the 
hymnographer knows a thousand other adventures of the god 
which he might sing, but he prefers this memorable incident, the 
charter and patent of consecration for the Delphian temple. 
Many different places did Apollo inspect ; he surveyed the coun- 
try of the Magnétes and the Perrhzbians, came to Idlkos, and 
passed over from thence to Eubcea and the plain of Lelanton. 
But even this fertile spot did not please him: he crossed the 
Euripus to Beeotia, passed by Teuméssus and Mykaléssus, and 
the then inaccessible and unoccupied forest on which the city of 
Thébes afterwards stood. He next proceeded to Onchéstos, but 
the grove of Poseidén was already established there; next across 
the Képhissus to Okalea, Haliartus, and the agreeable plain and 
much-frequented fountain of Delphusa, or Tilphusa. Pleased 
with the place, Apollo prepared to establish his oracle there, but 
Tilphusa was proud of the beauty of her own site, and did not 
choose that her glory should be eclipsed by that of the god.2 
She alarmed him with the apprehension that the chariots which 
contended in her plain, and the horses and mules which watered 
at her fountain would disturb the solemnity of his oracle ; and 
she thus induced him to proceed onward to the southern side of 
Parnassus, overhanging the harbor of Krissa. Here he establish- 
ed his oracle, in the mountainous site not frequented by chariots 
and horses, and near to a fountain, which however was guarded 
by a vast and terrific serpent, once the nurse of the monster 
Typhaén. This serpent Apollo slew with an arrow, and suffered 
its body to rot in the sun: hence the name of the place, Pythd,s 
and the surname of the Pythian Apollo. The plan of his temple 
being marked out, it was built by Trophénios and Agamédés, 

} Hom. Hymn. Apoll. i. 179. ? Hom. Hymn. Apoll. 262. 

7 Hom. Hymn. 363 — ridecVat, to rot. 





48 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


aided by a crowd of forward auxiliaries from the neighborhood. 
He now discovered with indignation, however, that Tilphusa had 
cheated him, and went back with swift step to resent it. “Thou 
shalt not thus,” he said, “succeed in thy fraud and retain thy 
beautiful water; the glory of the place shall be mine, and not 
thine alone.” Thus saying, he tumbled down a crag upon the 
fountain, and obstructed"her limped current: establishing an altar 
for himself in a grove hard by near another spring, where men 
still worship him as Apollo Tilphusios, because of his severe 
vengeance upon the once beautiful Tilphusa.! 

Apollo next stood in need of chosen ministers to take care of 
his temple and sacrifice, and to pronounce his responses at Pytho. 
Descrying a ship, “containing many and good men,” bound on 
traffic from the Minoian Knossus in Kréte, to Pylus in Pelopon- 
nésus, he resolved to make use of the ship and her crew for his 
purpose. Assuming the shape of a vast dolphin, he splashed 
about and shook the vessel so as to strike the mariners with ter- 
ror, while he sent a strong wind, which impelled her along the 
coast of Peloponnésus into the Corinthian Gulf, and finally to the 
harbor of Krissa, where she ran aground. The affrighted crew 
did not dare to disembark: but Apollo was seen standing on the 
shore in the guise of a vigorous youth, and inquired who they 
were, and what was their business. The leader of the Krétans 
recounted in reply their miraculous and compulsory voyage, when 
Apollo revealed himself as the author and contriver of it, announe- 
ing to them the honorable function and the dignified post to which 
he destined them.2 They followed him by his orders to the rocky 
Pytho on Parnassus, singing the solemn Jo-Paian such as it is sung 
in Kréte, while the god himself marched at their head, with his 
fine form and lofty step, playing on the harp. He showed them 
the temple and site of the oracle, and directed them to worship 
him as Apollo Delphinios, because they had first seen him in the 
shape of a dolphin. “ But how,” they inquired, “are we to live in 
a spot where there is neither corn, nor vine, nor pasturage?” 
“ Ye silly mortals,” answered the god, “ who look only for toil and 
privation, know that an easier lot is yours. Ye shall live by the 
cattle whom crowds of pious visitors will bring to the temple: ye 





' Hom. Hymn. Apoll. 381. ; 2? Hom. Hymn. Apoll 475 sqq 


* 
FIRST COMMENCEMENT OF THE DELPHIAN ORACLE. 49 


shall need only the knife to be constantly ready for sacrifice. 
Your duty will be to guard my temple, and to officiate as minis- 
ters at my feasts: but if ye be guilty of wrong or insolence, either 
by word or deed, ye shall become the slaves of other men, and 
shall remain so forever. ‘Take heed of the word and the warn- 
ing.” 

‘Such are the legends of Délos and Delphi, according to the 
Homeric Hymn to Apollo. The specific functions of the god, 
and the chief localities of his worship, together with the surnames 
attached to them, are thus historically explained, being connected 
with his past acts and adventures. Though these are to us only 
interesting poetry, yet to those who heard them sung they possess- 
ed all the requisites of history, and were fully believed as such, 
not because they were partially founded in reality, but because 
they ran in complete harmony with the feelings; and, so long as 
that condition was fulfilled, it was not the fashion of the time to 
canvass truth or falsehood. The narrative is purely personal, 
without any discernible symbolized doctrine or allegory, to serve 
as a supposed ulterior purpose: the particular deeds ascribed to 
Apollo grow out of the general preconceptions as to his attributes, 
combined with the present realities of his worship. It is neither 
history nor allegory, but simple mythe or legend. 

The worship of Apollo is among the most ancient, capital, and 
strongly marked facts of the Grecian world, and widely diffused 
over every branch of the race. It is older than the Iliad or 
Odyssey, in the latter of which both Pytho and Délos are noted, 
though Délos isnot named inthe former. But the ancient Apollo 
is different in more respects than one from the Apollo of later 
times. He is in an especial manner the god of the Trojans, un- 
friendly to the Greeks, and especially to Achilles; he has, more- 
over, only two primary attributes, his bow and his prophetic 
powers, without any distinct connection either with the harp, or 
with medicine, or with the sun, all which in later times he came 
to comprehend. He is not only, as Apollo Karneius, the chief 





? Homer. Hymn. Apoll. 535.— 
Ackirépy wan Exaorog Eyov ty yetpt wayatpav 
Loalerv aiet ujAa* ra b' édVova navta wapectat, 
“Ooca tudty’ dyaywor mipixAvra $02’ drn9parur. 


VOL. 1 > § 4oc. 


50 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


god of the Doric race, but also (under the surname of Patrous) 
the great protecting divinity of the gentile tie among the Jonians:1 
he is moreover the guide and stimulus to Grecian colonization, 
scarcely any colony being ever sent out without encouragement 
and direction from the oracle at Delphi: Apollo Archégetés is 
one of his great surnames.2 His temple lends sanctity to the 
meetings of the Amphiktyonic assembly, and he is always in 
filial subordination and harmony with his father Zeus: Delphi 
and Olympia are never found in conflict. In the Iliad, the warm 
and earnest patrons of the Greeks are Héré, Athéné, and Posei 
don: here too Zeus and Apollo are seen in harmony, for Zeus is 
decidedly well-inclined to the Trojans, and reluctantly sacrifices 
them to the importunity of the two great goddesses.3 The wor- 
ship of the Sminthian Apollo, in various parts of the Troad and 
the neighboring territory, dates before the earliest periods of 
ZEolic colonization:* hence the zealous patronage of Troy as- 
cribed to him in the Iliad. Altogether, however, the distribution 
and partialities of the gods in that poem are different from what 
they become in later times, —a difference which our means of 
information do not enable us satisfactorily to explain. Besides 
the Delphian temple, Apollo had numerous temples throughout 
Greece, and oracles at Abz in Phékis, on the Mount Ptodon, and 
at Tegyra in Beeotia, where he was said to have been born,5 at 
Branchide near Milétus, at Klarus in Asia Minor, and at Patara 
in Lykia. He was not the only oracular god: Zeus at Dodona 
and at Olympia gave responses also: the gods or heroes Tropho- 
nius, Amphiaraus, Amphilochus, Mopsus, etc., each at his own 





1 Harpocration y. "A7dAAwy wutpdo¢ and ‘Epxetoc Zebg. Apollo Delphi- 
nios also belongs to the Ionic Greeks generally. Strabo, iy. 179. 

? Thucydid. vi. 3; Kallimach. Hymn. Apoll. 56.— 

PoiBoc yap det rodiecar piAndet 
Krifouévaic, abrig d2 Bepeidia DoiBog vpaiver. 

3 Tliad, iv. 30-46. 

4 Tliad, i. 38, 451; Stephan. Byz. "IAov, Tévedoc. See also Klausen. A®Sneay 
und die Penaten, b.i. p. 69. The worship of Apollo Sminthios and the fes- 
tival of the Sminthia at Alexandria Troas lasted down to the time cf Menan- 
der the rhetor, at the close of the third century after Christ. 

5 Plutarch. Defect. Oracul. c. 5, p.412; ¢. 8, p. 414; Steph. Byz. y. Teyipa 
The temple of the Ptéan Apollo had acquir2d celebrity before the days of 
the poet Asius. Pausan. ix. 23, 3. 


LEGENDS RESPECTING APOLLU. 51 


sanctuary and in his own prescribed manner, rendered the same 
service. 

The two legends of Delphi and Délos, above noticed, form of 
course a very insignificant fraction of the narratives which once 
existed respecting the great and venerated Apollo. ‘They serve 
only as specimens, and as very early specimens,! to illustrate 
what these divine mythes were, and what was the turn of Gre- 
cian faith and imagination. ‘The constantly recurring festivals 
of the gods caused an incessant demand for new mythes respect- 
ing them, or at least for varieties and reproductions of the old 
mythes. Even during the third century of the Christian zra, in 
the time of the rhétér Menander, when the old forms of Pagan- 
ism were waning and when the stock of mythes in existence was 
extremely abundant, we see this demand in great force; but it 
was incomparably more operative in those earlier times when 
the creative vein of the Grecian mind yet retained its pristine 
and unfaded richness. Each god had many different surnames, 
temples, groves, and solemnities; with each of which was con- 
nected more or less of mythical narrative, originally hatched in 
the prolific and spontaneous fancy of a believing neighborhood, 
to be afterwards expanded, adorned and diffused by the song of 
the poet. The earliest subject of competition? at the great Pyth- 
ian festival was the singing of a hymn in honor of Apollo: other 
agones were subsequently added, but the ode or hymn constitu- 





The legend which Ephorus followed about the establishment of the Del- 
phian temple was something radically different from the Homeric Hymn 
(Ephori Fragm. 70, ed. Didot) : his narrative went far to politicize and ration- 
alize the story. The progeny of Apollo was very numerous, and of the 
most diverse attributes ; he was father of the Korybantes (Pherekydes, Fragm 
6, ed. Didot), as well as of Asklépios and Aristzus (Schol. Apollon. Rhod. ii. 
500; Apollod6r. iii. 10, 3). 

* Strabo, ix. p. 421. Menander the Rhetor (Ap. Walz. Coll. Rhett. t. ix. 
p- 136) gives an elaborate classification of hymns to the gods, distinguishing 
them into nine classes, — KAytixol, drxoreunrixo?, dvorkol, uvdixol, yevea- 
Aoytkol, retAacpévot, ebxrixol, dmevxriKol, uxToi : — the second class had ref- 
erence to the temporary absences or departure of a god to some distant place, 
which were often admitted in the ancient religion. Sappho and Alkman 
in their etic hymns invoked the gods from many different places, —Tiv pv 
yap "Apréuty éx prpiov piv dpewr, pupiov d& méAewr, Ett d2 ToTaLwY, dvaKa- 
det, —also Aphrodité and Apollo, etc. All these songs were full of adven- 
tures and details respecting the gods,— in other words of legendary matter. 


52 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


ted the fundamental attribute of the solemnity: the Pythia at 
Sikyon and elsewhere were probably framed on a similar footing. 
So too at the ancient and celebrated Charitésia, or festival of the 
Charites, at Orchomenos, the rivalry of the poets in their various 
modes of composition both began and continued as the predomi- 
nant feature:! and the inestimable treasures yet remaining to us 
of Attic tragedy and comedy, are gleanings from the once numer- 
ous dramas exhibited at the solemnity of the Dionysia. The 
Ephesians gave considerable rewards for the best hymns in honor 
of Artemis, to be sung at her temple.2 And the early lyric 
poets of Greece, though their works have not descended to us, 
devoted their genius largely to similar productions, as may be 
seen by the titles and fragments yet remaining. 

Both the Christian and the Mahomedan religions have begun 
during the historical age, have been propagated from one common 
centre, and have been erected upon the ruins of a different pre- 
existing faith. With none of these particulars did Grecian Pa- 
ganism correspond. It took rise in an age of imagination and 
feeling simply, without the restraints, as well as without the 
aid, of writing or records, of history or philosophy: it was, as a 
general rule, the spontaneous product of many separate tribes 
and localities, imitation and propagation operating as subordinate 
causes; it was moreover a primordial faith, as far as our means 
of information enable us to discover. ‘These considerations ex- 
plain to us two facts in the history of the early Pagan mind: first, 
the divine mythes, the matter of their religion, constituted also 
the matter of their earliest history; next, these mythes harmon- 
ized with each other only in their general types, but differed in- 
curably in respect of particular incidents. The poet who sung a 
new adventure of Apollo, the trace of which he might have heard 
in some remote locality, would take care that it should be agree- 
able to the general conceptions which his hearers entertained re- 
specting the god. He would not ascribe the cestus or amorous 
influences to Athéné, nor armed interference and the egis to 
Aphrodité; but, provided he maintained this general keeping, 
he might indulge his fancy without restraint in the particular 





? Pindar, Olymp. xiv.; Boeckh, Staatshaushaltung der Athener, Appen- 
dix, § xx. p. 357. 
® Alexander A£tolus. apud Macrobium, Saturn. vy. 22. 


APHRODITE. 58 


events of thestory.! The feelings and faith of his hearers went 
along with him, and there were no critical scruples to hold them 
back: to scrutinize the alleged proceedings of the gods was re- 
pulsive, and to dishelieve them impious. And thus these divine 
mythes, though they had their root simply in religious feelings, 
and though they presented great discrepancies of fact, served 
nevertheless as primitive matter of history to an early Greek: 
they were the only narratives, at once publicly accredited and 
interesting, which he possessed. To them were aggregated the 
heroic mythes (to which we shall proceed presently), — indeed 
the two are inseparably blended, gods, heroes and men almost 
always appearing in the same picture, — analogous both in their 
structure and their genesis, and differing chiefly in the circum- 
stance that they sprang from the type of a hero instead of from 
that of a god. 

We are not to be astonished if we find Aphrodité, in the Iliad, 
born from Zeus and Dioné,—and in the Theogony of Hesiod, 
generated from the foam on the sea after the mutilation of Ura- 
nos; nor if in the Odyssey she appears as the wife of Héphezestos, 
while in the Theogony the latter is married to Aglaia, and Aphro- 
dité is described as mother of three children by Arés.2 The 
Homerie hymn to Aphrodité details the legend of Aphrodité and 
Anchisés, which is presupposed in the Iliad as the parentage of 
E€neas: but the author of the hymn, probably sung at‘one of 
the festivals of Aphrodité in Cyprus, represents the goddess as 
ashamed of her passion for a mortal,and as enjoining Anchi- 
sés under severe menaces not to reveal who the mother of 
ZEneas was;3 while in the Iliad she has no scruple in publicly 





1 The birth of Apollo and Artemis from Zeus and Lét6 is among the oldest 
and most generally admitted facts in the Grecian divine legends. Yet Aischy- 
lus did not scruple to describe Artemis publicly as daughter of Démétér 
(Herodot. ii. 156 ; Pausan. viii. 37, 3). Herodotus thinks that he copied this 
innovation from the Egyptians, who affirmed that Apollo and Artemis were 
the sons of Dionysos and Isis. 

The number and discrepancies of the mythes respecting each god are at- 
tested by the fruitless attempts of learned Greeks to escape the necessity of 
rejecting any of them by multiplying homonymous personages, — three per 
sons named Zeus; five named Athéné; six named Apollo, ete. (Cicero, de 
Natur. Deor. iii. 21: Clemen. Alexand. Admon. ad Gent. p. 17). 

2 Hesiod, Theogon. 188, 934, 945; Homer, Iliad, v. 371; Odyss. viii. 268 

3 Homer, Hymn. Vener. 248, 286; Homer, Iliad, v. 320, 386. 


54 HISTORY CF GREECE. 


owning him, and he passes everywhere as her acknowledged son 
Aphrodité is described in the hymn as herself cold and unimpress 
ible, but ever active and irresistible in inspiring amorous feelings 
to gods, to men, and to animals. Three goddesses are record- 
ed as memorable exceptions to her universal empire, — Athéné, 
Artemis, and Hestia or Vesta. Aphrodité was one of the most 
important of all the goddesses in the mythical world; for the 
number of interesting, pathetic and tragical adventures deducible 
from misplaced or unhappy passion was of course yery great; 
and in most of these cases the intervention of Aphrodité was 
usually prefixed, with some legend to explain why she manifested 
herself. Her range of action grows wider in the later epic and 
lyric and tragic poets than in Homer.! 

Athéné, the man-goddess,? born from the head of Zeus, with- 
out a mother and without feminine sympathies, is the antithesis 
partly of Aphrodité, partly of the effeminate or womanized god 
Dionysos — the latter is an importation from Asia, but Athéné is 
a Greek conception — the type of composed, majestic and unre- 
lenting force. It appears however as if this goddess had been 
conceived in a different manner in different parts of Greece. For 
we find ascribed to her, in some of the legends, attributes of in- 
dustry and home-keeping; she is represented as the companion 


1 A large proportion of the Hesiodic epic related to the exploits and adven- 
tures of the heroic women, — the Catalogue of Women and the Eoiai em 
bodied a string of such narratives. Hesiod and Stesichorus explained the 
conduct of Helen and Klyteemnestra by the anger of Aphrodité, caused by 
the neglect of their father Tyndareus to sacrifice to her (Hesiod, Fragm. 59, 
ed. Duntzer; Stesichor. Fragm. 9, ed. Schneidewin) : the irresistible ascen- 
dency of Aphrodité is set forth in the Hippolytus of Euripidés nog less for- 
cibly than that of Dionysos in the Bacchx. The character of Daphnis the 
herdsman, well-known from the first Idyll of Theocritus, and illustrating the 
destroying force of Aphrodité, appears to have been first introduced into 
Greek poetry by Stesichorus (see Klausen, Aneas, und die Penaten, vol. i. 
pp. 526-529). Compare a striking piece among the Fragmenta Incerta of 
Sophoklés (Fr. 63, Brunck) and Euripid. Troad. 946, 995, 1048. Even in 
the Opp. et Di. of Hesiod, Aphrodité is conceived rather as a disturbing and 
injurious influence (v. 65). 

Adonis owes his renown to the Alexandrine poets and their contemporary 
sovereigns (see Bion’s Idyll and the Adoniazuse of Theocritus). The favor: 
ites of Aphrodité, even as counted up by the diligence of Clemens Alexan- 
drinus, are however very few in number. (Admonitio ad Gent. p. 12, Sylb.) 

2’Avdpodég JGpov........ ’AVavg Simmias Rhodius; NéAe cue, ap. He 
phastion. c. 9. p. 54, Gaisford. 





ATHENE.—ERECHTHEUS.— ARTEMIS. 54- 


of Hépheestos, patronizing handicraft, and expert at the loom and 
the spindle: the Athenian potters worshipped her along with 
Prométheus. Such traits of character do not square with the 
formidable zgis and the massive and crushing spear which Homer 
and most of the mythes assign to her. There probably were at first 
at least two different types of Athéné, and their coalescence has 
partially obliterated the less marked of the two.! Athéné is the 
constant and watchful protectress of Héraklés: she is also locally 
identified with the soil and people of Athens, even in the Iliad: 
Erechtheus, the Athenian, is born of the earth, but Athéné brings 
him up, nourishes him, and lodges him in her own temple, where 
the Athenians annually worship him with sacrifice and solemni- 
ties.2 It was altogether impossible to make Erechtheus son of 
Athéné, — the type of the goddess forbade it; but the Athenian 
mythe-creators, though they found this barrier impassable, strove 
to approach to it as near as they could, and the description which 
they give of the birth of Erichthonios, at once un-Homeric and 
unseemly, presents something like the phantom of maternity.3 
The huntress Artemis, in Arcadia and in Greece proper gen- 
erally, exhibits a well-defined type with which the legends 
respecting her are tolerably consistent. But the Ephesian as 
well as the Tauric Artemis partakes more of the Asiatic charac- 
fer, and has borrowed the attributes of the Lydian Great Mother 
as well as of an indigenous Tauric Virgin:4 this Ephesian Arte- 





’ Apollodér. ap. Schol. ad Sophokl. GEdip. vol. 57; Pausan. i. 24,3; ix. 26, 
3; Diodér, v. 73; Plato, Legg. xi. p. 920. In the Opp. et Di. of Hesiod, 
the carpenter is the servant of Athéné (429): see also Phereklos the réxrav 
in the Iliad, v. 61: compare viii. 385; Odyss. viii.493; and the Homeric 
Hymn, to Aphrodité, v.12. The learned article of O. Miiller (in the Ency- 
clopzdia of Ersch and Gruber; since republished among his Kleine Deutsche 
Schriften, p 134 seg.), Pallas Athéné, brings together all that can be known 
about this goddess. 

* Tliad, ii. 546; viii. 362. 

* Apollodor. iii. 4, 6. Compare the vague language of Plato, Kritias, ¢ c. 
iv. and Ovid, Metamorph. ii. 757. 

* Herodot. iv. 103; Strabo, xii. p. 534; xiii. p. 650. About the Ephesian 
Artemis, see Guhl, Fiphesiacs (Berlin, 1843), p- 79 sqq. Aristoph. Nub. 590; 
Autokrates in Tympanistis apud /®lian. Hist. Animal. xii. 9; and Spaaheln 
ad Kallimach. Hymn. Dian. 36. The dances in honor of Artemis some- 
times appear to have approached to the frenzied style of Bacchanal move- 
ment. See the words of Timotheus ap. Plutarch. de Audiend. Poet. p. 22 
ce 4, and wept Aecacd. c. 10, p. 170, also Aristoph. Lysist. 1314. They seer 


56 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


mis passed to the colonies of Phokewa and Milétus.! ‘Vhe 
Homeric Artemis shares with her brother Apollo in the dexterous 
use of the far-striking bow, and sudden death is described by the 
poet as inflicted by her gentle arrow. The jealousy of the gods 
at the withholding of honors and sacrifices, or at the presumption 
of mortals in contending with them,—a point of character so 
frequently recurring in the types of the Grecian gods, —mani- 
fests itself in the legends of Artemis: the memorable Kalydéni- 
an boar is sent by her as a visitation upon QMéneus, because he 
had omitted to sacrifice to her, while he did honor to other gods.? 
The Arcadian heroine Atalanta is however a reproduction of 
Artemis, with little or no difference, and the goddess is sometimes 
confounded even with her attendant nymphs. 

The mighty Poseidon, the earth-shaker and the ruler of the 
sea, is second only to Zeus in power, but has no share in those 
imperial and superintending capacities which the Father of gods 
and men exhibits. He numbers a numerous heroic progeny, 
usually men of great corporeal strength, and many of them 
belonging to the AXolic race: the great Neleid family of Pylus 
trace their origin up to him; and he is also the father of Poly- 
phémus the Cycléps, whose well-earned suffering he cruelly 
revenges upon Odysseus. ‘The island of Kalaureia is his Délos,3 
and there was held in it an old local Amphiktyony, for the pur- 
pose of rendering to him joint honor and sacrifice : the isthmus 
of Corinth, Heliké in Achaia, and Onchéstos in Beeotia, are also 
residences which he much affects, and where he is solemnly wor- 
shipped. But the abode which he originally and specially se- 
lected for himself was the Acropolis of Athens, where by a blow 
of his trident he produced a well of water in the rock: Athéné 
came afterwards and claimed the spot for herself, planting in 
token of possession the olive-tree which stood in the sacred grove 
of Pandrosos: and the decision either of the autochthonous 





to have been often celebrated in the solitudes of the mountains, which were 
the favorite resort of Artemis (Kallimach. Hymn. Dian. 19), and these 
tpetBaovae were always causes predisposing to fanatical excitement. 

' Strabo, iv. p. 179. ? Tliad, ix. 529, 

3 Strabo, viii. p. 874. According to the old poem called Eumolpia, as- 
cribed to Musgeus, the oracle of Delphi originally belonged to Poseidén an@ 
Gea, jointly: from Gea it passed to Themis, and from her to Apollo, te 
whom Poseidén also made over his share as a compensation for the sur. 
render of Kalaurcia to him. (Pausan. x. 5, 3). 


a 


POSEIDON. 57 


Cecrops, or of Erechtheus, awarded to her the preference, much 
to the displeasure of Poseidén. Either on this account, or on 
account of the death of his son Eumolpus, slain in assisting the 
Eleusinians against Erechtheus, the Attic .mythes ascribed to 
Poseidén great enmity against the Erechtheid family, which he 
is asserted to have ultimately overthrown: Theseus, whose glo- 
rious reign and deeds succeeded to that family, is said to have 
been really hisson.!_ In several other places, — in gina, Argos 
and Naxos,— Poseidén had disputed the privileges of patron- 
god with Zeus, Héré and Dionysos: he was worsted in all, but 
bore his defeat patiently.2 Poseidén endured a long slavery, in 
common with Apollo, gods as they were,? under Laomedén, king 
of Troy, at the command and condemnation of Zeus: the two 
gods rebuilt the walls of the city, which had been destroyed by 
Héraklés. When their time was expired, the insolent Laome- 
dén withheld from them the stipulated reward, and even accom- 
panied its refusal with appalling threats; and the subsequent 
animosity of the god against Troy was greatly determined by the 
sentiment of this injustice.4 Such periods of servitude, inflicted 
upon individual gods, are among the most remarkable of all the 
incidents in the divine legends. We find Apollo on another occa- 
sion condemned to serve Admétus, king of Phere, as a punish- 
ment for having killed the Cyclopes, and Héraklés also is sold as 
a slave to Omphalé. Even the fierce Arés, overpowered and 
imprisoned for a long time by the two Aloids,> is ultimately lib- 
erated only by extraneous aid. Such narratives attest the 
discursive range of Grecian fancy in reference to the gods, as 
well as the perfect commingling of things and persons, divine 
and human, in their conceptions of the past. The god who 
serves is for the time degraded: but the supreme god who com- 
mands the servitude is in the like proportion exalted, whilst the idea 
of some sort of order and government among these superhuman 
beings was never lost sight of. Nevertheless the mythes respect- 
ing the servitude of the gods became obnoxious afterwards, along 
with many others, to severe criticism on the part of philosophers. 





1 Apollod6r. iii. 14, 15 iii. 15, 3, 5. 2 Plutarch, Sympos. viii. 6, p. 741 
§ Tliad, ii. 716, 766; Euripid. Alkestis, 2. See Panyasis, Fragm. 12, p. 24 
ed. Diintzer. 


4 Tliad, vii. 452° xxi. 459. a 8 Tliad, vy. 386, 


58 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


The proud, jealous, and bitter Héré,—the goddess of the 
once-wealthy Mykéne, the fax et focus of the Trojan war, and 
the ever-present protectress of Jasén in the Argonautic expedi- 
tion, 1 — occupies an indispensable station in the mythical world. 
As the daughter of Kronos and wife of Zeus, she fills a throne 
from whence he cannot dislodge her, and which gives her a right 
perpetually to grumble and to thwart him.2 Her unmeasured 
jealousy of the female favorites of Zeus, and her antipathy 
against his sons, especially against Héraklés, has been the sug- 
gesting cause of innumerable mythes: the general type of her 
character stands here clearly marked, as furnishing both stimulus 
and guide to the mythopeic fancy. The “Sacred Wedding,” or 
marriage of Zeus and Héré, was familiar to epithalamie poets 
long before it became a theme for the spiritualizing ingenuity of 
critics. 

Hépheestos is the son of Héré without a father, and stands to 
her in the same relation as Athéné to Zeus: her pride and want 
of sympathy are manifested by her casting him out at once in 
consequence of his deformity.3 He is the god of fire, andespe- 
cially of fire in its practical applications to handicraft, and is in- 
dispensable as the right-hand and instrument of the gods. His 
skill and his deformity appear alternately as the source of myth- 
ical stories: wherever exquisite and effective fabrication is 
intended to be designated, Héphzestos is announced as the maker, 
although in this function the type of his character is reproduced 
in Dedalos. In the Attic legends he appears intimately united 
both with Prométheus and with Athéné, in conjunction with 
whom he was worshipped at Kolonus near Athens. Lemnos was 
the favorite residence of Héphzstos; and if we possessed more 
knowledge of this island and its town Héphestias, we should 
doubtless find abundant legends detailing his adventures and 
interventions. 

The chaste, still, and home-keeping Hestia, goddess of the 
family hearth, is far less fruitful in mythical narratives, ir spite 
of her very superior dignity, than the knavish, smooth-torgued, 
keen, and acquisitive Hermés. His function of messenger of the 





1 Tliad, iv. 51; Odyss. xii. 72. 
* Tliad, i. 544; iv. 29-38: viii. 408. 3 Tliad, xviii. 306. 


HéRMES.— HOMERIC HYMN. 59 


gods brings him perpetually on the stage, and affords ample scope 
for portraying the features of his character. The Homeric hymn 
to Hermés describes the scene and circumstances of his birth, 
and the almost instantaneous manifestation, even in infancy, of 
his peculiar attributes ; it explains the friendly footing on which 
he stood with Apollo, —the interchange of gifts and functions 
between them,—and lastly, the inviolate security of all the 
wealth and offerings in the Delphian temple, exposed as they 
were to thieves without any visible protection. Such was the 
innate cleverness and talent of Hermés, that on the day he was 
born he invented the lyre, stringing the seven chords on the shell 
of a tortoise :! and he also stole the cattle of Apollo in Pieria, 
‘dragging them backwards to his cave in Arcadia, so that their 
track could not be detected. To the remonstrances of his mother 
Maia, who points out to him the danger of offending Apollo, 
Hermés replies, that he aspires to rival the dignity and functions 
of Apollo among the immortals, and that if his father Zeus 
refuses to grant them to him, he will employ his powers of thiev- 
ing in breaking open the sanctuary at Delphi, and in carrying 
away the gold and the vestments, the precious tripods and ves- 
sels.2 Presently Apollo discovers the loss of his cattle, and 
after some trouble finds his way to the Kyllénian cavern, where 
he sees Hermés asleep in his cradle. The child denies the theft 
with effrontery, and even treats the surmise as a ridiculous impos- 
sibility: he persists in such denial even before Zeus, who how- 
ever detects him at once, and compels him to reveal the place 
where the cattle are concealed. But the lyre was as yet un- 
known to Apollo, who has heard nothing except the voice of the 
Muses and the sound of the pipe. So powerfully is he fascinated 
by hearing the tones of the lyre from Hermés, and so eager to 
become possessed of it, that he is willing at once to pardon the past 





1 Homer. Hymn. Mercur. 18.— 
"Hoc yeyovas, péow huate éynudapiler, 
‘Eorépioc Bote kAépev éxnd2ov ’ArdAAwvos, ete. 
* Homer. Hymn. Mere. 177. — 
Eipi ydp é¢ Titwva, péyav dépov dvtirophoey, 
"Evtev ddic tpimodac meptxadnéac, 402 AEBnrag 
Tlopijow kal ypvodr, etc. 


60 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


theft, and even to conciliate besides the friendship of Hermés.! 
Accordingly a bargain is struck between the two gods and sane. 
tioned by Zeus. Hermés surrenders to Apollo the lyre, invent- 
ing for his own use the syrinx or panspipe, and receiving from 
Apollo in exchange the golden rod of wealth, with empire over 
flocks and herds as well as over horses and oxen and the wild 
animals of the woods. He presses to obtain the gift of prophecy, 
but Apollo is under a special vow not to impart that privilege to 
any god whatever: he instructs Hermés however how to draw 
information, to a certain extent, from the Mcere or Fates them- 
selves; and assigns to him, over and above, the function of mes- 
senger of the gods to Hadés. 

Although Apollo has acquired the lyre, the particular saj6et 
of his wishes, he is still under apprehension that Hermés will 
steal it away from him again, together with his bow, and he 
exacts a formal oath by Styx as security. Hermés promises 
solemnly that he will steal none of the acquisitions, nor ever 
invade the sanctuary of Apollo; while the latter on his part 
pledges himself to recognize Hermés as his chosen friend and 
companion, amongst all the other sons of Zeus, human or divine2 

So came to pass, under the sanction of Zeus, the marked favor 
shown by Apollo to Hermés. But Hermés (concludes the 
hymnographer, with frankness unusual in speaking of a god) 
“does very little good: he avails himself of the darkness of night 
to cheat without measure the tribes of mortal men.”3 





1 Homer. Hymn. Mere. 442-454. 
° Homer. Hymn. Mere. 504-520. — 
Kal 76 pév ‘Eppie 
Antoidny ébidnoe Staumepic, Oc tL Kal viv, ete. 
* * * * * 

Kai rote Maiadog vide brooyouevoc Katévevoe 
My ror’ droKAépery, 50° ‘ExnBodog éxteatioTat, 
Mydé ror’ éureAdoety rvKivy déup* abrap ’ArdAAav 
Anroidng xarévevoev én’ dpSud Kat oir6ryTe 
Mf Tiva giArep:v GAAov by GVavaroroww éEceodat 
Mare Yedv, uqr’ dvdpa Atd¢ yévor, ete. 

* Homer. Hymn. Merc. 574. — 
Tlatpa piv oty dvive st, Td 0 dxpiroy nreporeder 
No«ra 6v’ dp¢vainy diAa Sunray dvbpérer. 


ZEUS ANU HIS Al TRIBUTES. 61 


Here the general types of Hermés and Apollo, coupled with. 
the present fact that no thief ever approached the rich and seem- 
ingly accessible treasures of Delphi, engender a string of exposi- 
tory incidents cast into a quasi-historical form and detailing how it 
happened that Hermés had bound himself by especial convention 
to respect the Delphian temple. The types of Apollo seem to 
kave been different in different times and parts of Greece: in 
some places he was worshipped as Apollo Nomios,! or the patron 
of pasture and cattle; and this attribute, which elsewhere passed 
over to his son Aristzus, is by our hymnographer voluntarily 
surrendered to Hermés, combined with the golden rod of fruit- 
fulness. On the other hand, the lyre did not originally belong 
to the Far-striking King, nor is he at all an inventor: the hymn 
explains both its first invention and how it came into his posses- 
sion. And the value of the incidents is thus partly expository, 
partly illustrative, as expanding in detail the general preconceived 
character of the Kyllénian god. 

To Zeus more amours are ascribed than to any of the other 
gods, — probably because the Grecian kings and chieftains were 
especially anxious to trace their lineage to the highest and most 
glorious of all,— each of these amours having its representative 
progeny on earth.2 Such subjects were among the most promis- 
ing and agreeable for the interest of mythical narrative, and 
Zeus as a lover thus became the father of a great many legends, 
branching out into innumerable interferences, for which his sons, 
all of them distinguished individuals, and many of them perse-~ 
cuted by Héré, furnished the occasion. But besides this, the 
commanding functions of the supreme god, judicial and admin- 
istrative, extending both over gods and men, was a potent stimu- 
lus to the mythopeeic activity. Zeus has to watch over his own 
dignity, — the first of all considerations with a god: moreover as 
Horkios, Xenios, Ktésios, Meilichios, (a small proportion of his 
thousand surnames,) he guaranteed oaths and punished pérjurers, 
he enforced the observance of hospitality, he guarded the family 
hoard and the crop realized for the year, and he granted expia- 





1 Kallimach. Hymn. Apoll. 47 
* Kallimach. Hymn. Jov. 79. ’Ex d@ Aude Baatdijec, ete. 


62 HISTORY OF GREECE 


tion to the repentant criminal.! All thes2 different functions 
created a demand for mythes, as the means of translating a dim, 
but serious, presentiment into distinct form, both self-explaining 
and communicable to others. In enforcing the sanctity of the 
oath or of the tie of hospitality, the most powerful of all argu- 
ments would be a collection of legends respecting the judgments 
of Zeus Horkios or Xenios; the more impressive and terrific 
such legends were, the greater would be their interest, and the 
less would any one dare to disbelieve them. They constituted 
the natural outpourings of a strong and common sentiment, prob- 
ably without any deliberate ethical intention : the preconceptions 
of the divine agency, expanded into legend, form a product 
analogous to the idea of the divine features and symmetry em- 
bodied in the bronze or the marble statue. 

But it was not alone the general type and attributes of the gods 
which contributed to put in action the mythopeeic propensities. 
The rites and solemnities forming the worship of each god, as 
well as the details of his temple and its locality, were a fertile 
source of mythes, respecting his exploits and sufferings, which to 
the people who heard them served the purpose of past history. 
The exegetes, or local guide and interpreter, belonging to each 
temple, preserved and recounted to curious strangers these trad,- 
tional narratives, which lent a certain dignity even to the minu- 
tix of divine service. Out of a stock of materials thus ample, 
the poets extracted individual collections, such as the “ Causes” 
(Aizia) of Kallimachus, now lost, and such as the Fasti of Ovid 
are for the Roman religious antiquities.2 

It was the practice to offer to the gods in sacrifice the bones 
of the victim only, inclosed in fat: how did this practice arise ? 





1 See Herodot. i. 44. Xenoph. Anabas. vii. 8,4 Plutarch, Théseus, 
ce. 12. 
? Ovid, Fasti, iv. 211, about the festivals of Apollo: — 
3 “ Priscique imitamina facti 
ZEra Dex comites raucaque terga movent.” 


And Lactantius, v. 19, 15. “Ipsos ritus ex rebus gestis (deorum) vel ex 
casibus vel etiam ex mortibus, natos:” to the same purpose Augustin. De 
Civ. D. vii. 18; Diodér. iii. 56. Plutarch’s Questiones Grace et Romaice 
are full of similar tales, professing to account for existing customs, many 
of them religious and liturgic. See Lobeck, Orphica, p. 675. 


LEGENDS RESPECTING THE GODS 63 


The author of the Hesiodic Theogony has a story which explains 
it: Prométheus tricked Zeus into an imprudent choice, at the 
period when the gods and mortal men first came to an arrange- 
ment about privileges and duties (in Mekéné). Prométheus, the 
tutelary representative of man, divided a large steer into two 
portions: on the one side he placed the flesh and guts, folded up 
in the omentum and covered over with the skin: on the other, he 
put the bones er.veloped in fat. He then invited Zeus to deter- 
mine which of the two portions the gods would prefer to receive 
from mankind. Zeus “with both hands” decided for and took 
the white fat, but was highly incensed on finding that he had got 
nothing at the bottom except the bones.!_ Nevertheless the choice 
of the gods was now irrevocably made: they were not entitled to 
any portion of the sacrificed animal beyond the bones and the 
white fat; and the standing practice is thus plausibly explained.? 
I select this as one amongst a thousand instances to illustrate the 
genesis of legend out of religious practices. In the belief of the 
people, the event narrated in the legend was the real producing 
cause of the practice: but when we come to apply a sound criti- 
cism, we are compelled to treat the event as existing only in its 
narrative legend, and the legend itself as having been, in the 
greater number of cases, engendered by the practice, — thug 
reversing the supposed order of production. 


1 Hesiod, Theog. 550.— 
7 ba dododpovéwy: Zede 0 dpdira undea eiddc¢ 
Tv6 p’ ob0? Hyvoince dddov: Kaka 0 dcceTo Suud 
Ovyroig dvdporocet, ra Kal TeAéeodat EuedAerv. 
Xepot 0’ dy’ dyporépyow aveideto AevKdy direrdap 
Xocaro dé dpévac, dudt xOAog dé wv ikero Srudy, 
‘Qe idev LoTea Aevkd Bode Sorin Ent réxvy. 





In the second line of this citation, the poet tells us that Zeus saw through 
the trick, and was imposed upon by his own consent, foreknowing that after 
all the mischievous consequences of the proceeding would be visited on 
man. But the last lines, and indeed the whole drift of the legend, imply tha 
contrary of this: Zeus was really taken in, and was in consequence very 
angry. It is curious to observe how the religious feelings of the poet drive 
him to save in words the prescience of Zeus, though in doing so he contra- 
dicts aud nullifies the whole point of the story. 
2 Hesiod, Theog. 557. — 
‘Ex tod 0’ aVavarotow ent ySovi gin’ dv3péruv 
Kaioua’ batea eved Sunévtwr ent Boudr. 


64 HISTOR’ OF GREECE. 


In dealing with Grecian mythes generally, it ts convenient te 
distribute them into such as belong to the Gods and such as 
belong to the Heroes, according as the one or the other are the 
prominent personages. ‘The former class manifests, more palpa- 
bly than the latter, their real origin, as growing out of the faith 
and the feelings, without any necessary basis, either of matter 
of fact or allegory: moreover, they elucidate more directly the © 
religion of the Greeks, so important an item in their character as 
a people. But in point of fact, most of the mythes present to 
us Gods, Heroes and Men, in juxtaposition one with the other 
and the richness of Grecian mythical literature arises from the 
infinite diversity of combinations thus opened out; first by the 
three class-types, God, Hero, and Man; next by the strict keep- 
ing with which each separate class and character is handled. We 
shall now follow downward the stream of mythical time, which 
begins with the Gods, to the Heroic legends, or those which 
principally concern the Heroes and Heroines ; for the latter were 
to the full as important in legend as the former. 





CHAPTER II. 
LEGENDS RELATING TO HEROES AND MEN. 


Tue Hesiodic theogony gives no account of anything like a 
creation of man, nor does it seem that such an idea was muck 
entertained in the legendary vein of Grecian imagination; which 
commonly carried back the present men by successive generations 
to some primitive ancestor, himself sprung from the soil, or from 
a neighboring river or mountain, or from a god, a nymph, ete. 
But the poet of the Hesiodic “ Wurks and Days” has given us a 
narrative conceived in a very different spirit respecting the origin 
of the human race, more in harmony with the sober and melan- 
choly ethical tone which reigns through that poem.! 





’ Hesiod, as cited in the Etymologicon Magnum (probably the Hesiodie 


LEGENDS RELATING TO HEROES AND MEN. 63 


First (he tells us) the Olympic gods made the golden race, — 
good, perfect, and happy men, who lived from the spontaneous 
abundance of the earth, in ease and tranquillity like the gods 
themselves: they suffered neither disease nor old age, and their 
death was like a gentle sleep. After death they became, by the 
award of Zeus, guardian terrestrial daemons, who watch unseen 
over the proceedings of mankind — with the regal privilege of 
dispensing to them wealth, and taking account of good and bad 
deeds.! 

Next, the gods made the silver race, — unlike and greatly infe- 
rior, both in mind and body, to the golden. The men of this 
race were reckless and mischievous towards each other, and dis- 
dainful of the immortal gods, to whom they refused to offer either 
worship or sacrifice. Zeus in his wrath buried them in the 
earth: but there they still enjoy a secondary honor, as the’ Blest 
of the under-world.? 

Thirdly, Zeus made the brazen race, quite different from the 
silver. They were made of hard ash-wood, pugnacious and ter- 
rible; they were of immense strength and adamantine soul, nor 
did they raise or touch bread. Their arms, their houses. and 
their implements were all of brass: there was then no iron. 
This race, eternally fighting, perished by each other’s hands, died 
out, and descended without name or privilege to Hadés.3 





Catalogue of Women, as Marktscheffel considers it, placing it Fragm. 133), 
gives the parentage of a certain Brotos, who must probably be intended as 
the first of men: Bpdroc, O¢ piv Eijuepog 6 Meconvioc, dd Bpdérov tivog 
abréxSovoc* 6 dé “Hotodog, xd Bpdrov rot AiSepoc xat ‘Hyuépac. 
1 Opp. Di. 120.— 
Abrdp éreid) robto yévocg Kara yaia KaAvpev 
Tot wiv daipovés eiot Ade weyaAov did Bovade 
EodAol, ériySévior, pbAakeo Svyrdv dvdpérorv 
Oi pa gvAdcooveiv te dixag Kat oyérALa Epya, 
*"Hépa éoodpevor, wavtn dotrvreg éx’ aiav 
TlAovrédora:+ Kal rovro yépac BaotAniov Ecyxov. 
2 Opp. Di. 140.— 
Abrap ere? kat todo yévog kata yaia KaArnpe, 
Tot pév broydévioe pakapec Svynrot Kkadéovtat 
Actrepot, dad’ Eurrne Tysh Kat toiow drndet. 
3 The ash was the wood out of which spear-handles were made (Iliad, xvi 
142): the Nougat MéAvae are born along with the Gigantes and the Erin 
VOL. I. doc. 


66 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Next, Zeus made a fourth race, far juster and better than the 
last preceding. These were the Heroes or demigods, who fought 
at the sieges of Troy aud Thébes. But this splendid stock alse 
became extinct: some perished in war, others were removed by 
Zeus to a happier state in the islands of the Blest. There they 
dwell in peace and comfort, under the government of Kronos, 
reaping thrice in the year the spontaneous produce of the earth.! 

The fifth race, which succeeds to the Heroes, is of iron: it is 
the race to which the poet himself belongs, and bitterly does he 
regret it. He finds his contemporaries mischievous, dishonest, 
unjust, ungrateful, given to perjury, careless both of the ties of 
consanguinity and of the behests of the gods: Nemesis and Aidés 
(Ethical Self-reproach) have left earth and gone back to Olym- 
pus. How keenly does he wish that his lot had been cast either 
earlier or later!2. This iron race is doomed to continual guilt, 
care, and suffering, with a small infusion of good; but the time 
will come when Zeus will put an end to it. The poet does not 
venture to predict what sort of race will succeed. 

Such is the series of distinct races of men, which Hesiod, or 
the author of the “Works and Days,” enumerates as having 
existed down to his own time. I give it as it stands, without 
placing much confidence in the various explanations which critics 
have offered. It stands out in more than one respect from the 
general tone and sentiment of Grecian legend: moreover the 
sequence of races is neither natural nor homogeneous, — the 
heroic race not having any metallic denomination, and not occu- 
pying any legitimate place in immediate succession to the brazen. 
Nor is the conception of the demons in harmony either with 
Homer or with the Hesiodic theogony. In Homer, there is 
searcely any distinction between gods and demons, while the gods 





nyes (Theogon. 187), — “gensque virdm truncis et duro robore nata” (Vir 
gil, Aineid, viii. 315), — hearts of oak. 
1 Opp. Di. 157. — 


Avdpav ‘Hpdar Veiov yévoc, of kadsovtat 
Hyuideo: xporépy yevéy kar’ areipova yaiaw. 

Opp Di. 173.— 
Maker’ Exetr’ Oderrov éy@ méumrorot pereivat 
’"Avdpaorv, An’ } mpdode Saveiv, } Exeira yevéodas 
Nov yap 6) yévog éari atdjpeov. «+++» 


GOLDEN, S.LVER, BRAZEN, ETC. RACES 67 


are stated to go about and visit the cities of meu in various dis- 
guises for the purpose of inspecting good and evil proceedings. 
But in the poem now before us, the distinction between gods and 
dxmons is generic. The latter are invisible tenants of earth, 
remnants of the once happy golden race whom the Olympic gods 
first made: the remnants of the second or silver race are not 
dzemons, nor are they tenants of earth, but they still enjoy an 
honorable posthumous existence as the Blest of the under-world. 
Nevertheless the Hesiodic demons are in no way authors or 
abettors of evil: on the contrary, they form the unseen police 
of the gods, for the purpose of repressing wicked behavior in the 
world. 

We may trace, I think, in this quintuple succession of earthly 
races, set forth by the author of the “ Works and Days,” the con- 
fluence of two veins of sentiment, not consistent one with the 
other, yet both coéxisting in the author’s mind. The drift of 
his poem is thoroughly didactic and ethical: though deeply pene- 
trated with the injustice and suffering which darken the face of 
human life, he nevertheless strives to maintain, both in himself 
and in others, a conviction that on the whole the just and labo- 
rious man will come off well,2 and he enforces in considerable 
detail the lessons of practical prudence and virtue. This ethical 
sentiment, which dictates his appreciation of the present, also 
guides his imagination as to the past. It is pleasing to him to 
bridge over the chasm between the gods and degenerate man, by 





1 Odyss. xvii. 486. 

® There are some lines, in which he appears to believe that, under the present 
wicked and treacherous rulers, it is not the interest of any man to be just 
(Opp. Di. 270) : — 


Nov d7 8) 0 par’ abtog dv dv pdrovet dixatog 
Einu, unr’ éude vidgs émet xaxdv éort dixacov 
‘Expevat, ei peila ye dixnv ddixdrepoc Efe - 
"AAA 760’ obrrw EoAra TeAeiv Aia reprixépavvor. 


Un the whole, however, his conviction is to the contrary. 

Plutarch rejects the above four lines, seemingly on no other ground than 
gecause he thought them immoral and unworthy of Hesiod (see Proclus ad 
lee.). But they fallin perfectly with the temper of the poem: and the rule 
of Plutarch is inadmissible, in determining the critical question of what is 
beruine or spurious. 


68 HISTOR: OF GREECE. 


the supposition of previous races, —the first altogether pure, the 
second worse than the first, and the third still worse than the 
second ; and to show further how the first race passed by gentle 
death-sleep into glorious immortality ; how the second race was 
sufficiently wicked to drive Zeus to bury them in the under-world, 
yet s‘ill leaving them a ‘certain measure of honor; while the 
third was so desperately violent as to perish by its own animosi- 
ties, without either name or honor of any kind. The conception 
of the golden race passing after death into good guardian demons, 
which some suppose to have been derived from a comparison 
with oriental angels, presents itself to the poet partly as approx- 
imating this race to the gods, partly as a means of constituting a 
triple gradation of post-obituary existence, proportioned to the 
character of each race whilst alive. ‘The denominations of gold 
and silver, given to the first two races, justify themselves, like 
those given by Simonidés of Amorgos and by Phokylidés to the 
different characters of women, derived from the dog, the bee, the 
mare, the ass, and other animals; and the epithet of brazen is 
specially explained by reference to the material which the pugna- 
cious third race so plentifully employed for their arms and other 
implements. 

So far we trace intelligibly enough the moralizing vein: we 
find the revolutions of the past so arranged as to serve partly as 
an ethical lesson, partly as a suitable preface to the present.!’ But 
fourth in the list comes “the divine race of Heroes:” and here 
a new vein of thought is opened by the poet. The symmetry 
of his ethical past is broken up, in order to make way for these 
cherished beings of the national faith. For though the author of 
the “Works and Days” was himself of a didactic cast of thought, 





1 Aratus (Phsenomen. 107) gives only three successive races, — the golden, 
silver, and brazen; Ovid superadds to these the iron race (Metamorph. i. 
89-144): neither of them notice the heroic race. 

The observations both of Buttmann (Mythos der altesten Menschengesch- 
lechter, t. ii. p. 12 of the Mythologus) and of V6lcker (Mythologie des 
Japetischen Geschlechts, § 6, pp. 250-279) on this series of distinct races, 
are ingenious, and may be read with profit. Both recognize the disparate 
character of the fourth link in the series, and each accounts for it in a differ- 
ent manner. My own view comes nearer to that of Vélcker, with some con- 
siderable differences; amongst which one is, that he rejects the verses respect: 
ing the demons, which seem to me capital parts of the whole scheme. 


al 


pC ae eo eee Se eee oe 


HESIODIC WORKS AND DAYS. 69 


like Phokylidés, or Solon, or Theognis, yet he had present to his 
feelings, in common with his countrymen, the picture of Grecian 
foretime, as it was set forth in the current mythes, and still more 
in Homer and those other epical productions which were then the 
only existing literature and history. It was impossible for him 
to exclude, from his sketch of the past, either the great persons 
or the glorious exploits which these poems ennobled; and even 
if he himself could have consented to such an exclusion, the 
sketch would have become repulsive to his hearers. But the 
chiefs who figured before Thébes and Troy could not be well 
identified either with the golden, the silver, or the brazen race: 
moroyver it was essential that they should be placed in immediate 
contiguity with the present race, because their descendants, real 
or supposed, were the most prominent and conspicuous of exist- 
ing men. Hence the poet is obliged to assign to them the fourth 
place in the series, and to interrupt the descending ethical move- 
ment: in order to interpolate them between the brazen and the 
iron race, with neither of which they present any analogy. The 
iron race, to which the poet himself unhappily belongs, is the 
legitimate successor, not of the heroic, but of the brazen. Instead 
of the fierce and self-annihilating pugnacity which characterizes 
the latter, the iron race manifests an aggregate of smaller and 
meaner vices and mischiefs. It will not perish by suicidal 
extinction — but it is growing worse and worse, and is gradually 
losing its vigor, so that Zeus will not vouchsafe to preserve much 
longer such.a race upon the earth. 

We thus see that the series of races imagined by the poet. of 
the “Works and Days” is the product of two distinct and 
incongruous veins of imagination,—the didactic or ethical 
blending with the primitive mythical or epical. His poem is 
remarkable as the most ancient didactic production of the Greeks, 
and as one of the first symptoms of a new tone of sentiment 
finding its way into their literature, never afterwards to become 
extinct. The tendency of the “Works and Days” is anti- 
heroic: far from seeking to inspire admiration for adventur- 
ous enterprise, the author inculeates the strictest justice, the 
most unremitting labor and frugality, and a sober, not to say 
anxious, estimate of all the minute specialties of the future. 
Prudence and probity are his means,— practical comfort and 


‘ 


70 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


happiness his end. But he deeply feels, and keenly exposes, the 
manifold wickedness and short-comings of his contemporaries, in 
reference to this capital standard. He turns with displeasure 
from the present men, not because they are too feeble to hurl 
either the spear of Achilles or some vast boundary-stone, but 
because they are rapacious, knavish, and unprincipled. 

The demons first introduced into the religious atmosphere of 
the Grecian world by the author of the “ Works and Days,” as 
generically different from the gods, but as essentially good, and 
as forming the intermediate agents and police between gods and 
men, —are deserving of attention as the seed of a doctrine 
which afterwards underwent many changes, and became of great 
importance, first as one of the constituent elements of pagan faith, 
then as one of the helps to its subversion. It will be recollected 
that the buried remnants of the half-wicked silver race, though 
they are not recognized as demons, are still considered as having 
a substantive existence, a name, and dignity, in the under-world. 
The step was easy, to treat them as demons also, but as demons of 
a defective and malignant character: this step was made by Empe- 
doclés and Xenocratés, and to a certain extent ‘countenanced by 
Plato.! There came thus to be admitted among the pagan philoso- 
phers demons both good and bad, in every degree: and these da- 
mons were found available as a means of explaining many phe- 
nomena for which it was not convenient to admit the agency of the 
gods. They served to relieve the gods from the odium of physical 
and moral evils, as well as from the necessity of constantly med- 
dling in small affairs; and the objectionable ceremonies of the 
pagan world were defended upon the ground that in no other way 
could the exigencies of such malignant beings be appeased. 
They were most frequently noticed as causes of evil, and thus the 
name (demon) came insensibly to convey with it a bad sense, — 
the idea of an evil being as contrasted with the goodness of a god. 
So it was found by the Christian writers when they commenced 
their controversy with paganism. One branch of their argu- 
ment led them to identify the pagan gods with demons in the 
evil sense, and the insensible change in the received meaning of 
the word lent them a specious assistance. For they could easily 


—— 





* See this subject further mentioned — tvfra, chap. xvi. p. 565, 


DEMONS IN HESIOD. 71 


show that not only in Homer, but in the general language of 
early pagans, all the gods generally were spoken of as demons — 
and therefore, verbally speaking, Clemens and Tatian seemed to 
affirm nothing more against Zeus or Apollo than was employed 
in the language of paganism itself. Yet the audience of Homer 
or Sophoklés would have strenuously repudiated the proposition, 
if it had been put to them in the sense which the word demon 
bore in the age and among the circle of these Christian writers. 

In the imagination of the author of the “Works and Days,” 
the dxmons occupy an important place, and are regarded as 
being of serious practical efficiency. When he is remonstrating 
with the rulers around him upon their gross injustice and corrup- 
tion, he reminds them of the vast number of these immortal ser- 
vants of Zeus who are perpetually on guard amidst mankind, 
and through whom the visitations of the gods will descend even 
upon the most potent evil doers.!_ His supposition that the dex- 
mons were not gods, but departed men of the golden race, allowed 
him to multiply their number indefinitely, without too much 
cheapening the divine dignity. 

As this poet has been so much enslaved by the current legends 
as to introduce the Heroic race into a series to which it does not 
legitimately belong, so he has under the same influence inserted 
in another part of his poem the mythe of Pandora and Promé- 
theus,2 as a means of explaining the primary diffusion, and actual 
abundance, of evil among mankind. Yet this mythe can in no 
way consist with his quintuple scale of distinct races, and is in 
fact a totally distinct theory to explain the same problem, — the 
transition of mankind from a supposed state of antecedent hap- 
piness to one of present toil and suffering. Such an inconsistency 
is not a sufficient reason for questioning the genuineness of either 
passage; for the two stories, though one contradicts the other, 
both harmonize with that central purpose which governs the 
author’s mind,— a querulous and didactic appreciation of the pres- 
ent. That such was his purpose appears not only from the whole 
tenor of his poem, but also from the remarkable fact that his own 
personality, his own adventures and kindred, and his own suffer- 
ings, figure in it conspicuously. And this introduction of self 





* Opp. Di. 252. Tpic yap pipioi eiow ér? yVovi rovAvBoreipy, ete. 
? Opp. Di. 50-105. 


72 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


imparts to it a peculiar interest. The father cf Hesiod came 
over from the Aolic Kymé, with the view of bettering his con- 
dition, and settled at Askra in Boeotia, at the foot of Mount Heli 
con. After his death his two sons divided the family inheritance: 
but Hesiod bitterly complains that his brother Persés cheated and 
went to law with him, and obtained through corrupt judges an 
unjust decision. He farther reproaches his brother with a prefer- 
ence for the suits and unprofitable bustle of the agora, at a time 
when he ought to be laboring for his subsistence in the field. 
Askra indeed was a miserable place, repulsive both in summer 
and winter. Hesiod had never crossed the sea, except once from 
Aulis to Eubcea, whither he went to attend the funeral games of 
Amphidamas, the chief of Chalkis: he sung a hymn, and gained 
as prize a tripod, which he consecrated to the muses in Helicon.! 

These particulars, scanty as they are, possess a peculiar value, 
as the earliest authentic memorandum respecting the doing or 
suffering of any actual Greek person. There is no external tes- 
timony at all worthy of trust respecting the age of the “ Works 
and Days:” Herodotus treats Hesiod and Homer as belonging to 
the same age, four hundred years before his own time; and there 
are other statements besides, some placing Hesiod at an earlier 
date than Homer, some at a later. Looking at the internal evi- 
dences, we may observe that the pervading sentiment, tone and 
purpose of the poem is widely different from that of the Iliad 
and Odyssey, and analogous to what we read respecting the com- 
positions of Archilochus and the Amorgian Simonidés. The au- 
thor of the “ Works and Days” is indeed a preacher and nota 
satirist: but with this distinction, we find in him the same pre- 
dominance of the present and the positive, the same disposition 
to turn the muse into an exponent of his own personal wrongs, 
the same employment of Aésopic fable by way of illustration, and 
the same unfavorable estimate of the female sex,2? all of which 





1 Opp. Di. 630-650, 27-45. 

2 Compare the fable (aivoc) in the “ Works and Days,” v. 200, with those 
in Archilochus, Fr. xxxviii. and xxxix., Gaisford, respecting the fox and the 
ape; and the legend of Pandéra (v. 95 and v. 705) with the fragment of 
Simonidés of Amorgos respecting women (Fr. viii. ed. Welcker, v. 95-115); 
also Phokylidés ap. Stobeum Florileg. lxxi. 

Isokratés assimilates the character of the ‘‘ Works and Days” to that of 
Theognis and Phokylidés (ad Nik4kl. Or. ii. p. 23). 


HESIODIC POEMS. 73 


may be traced in the two poets above mentioned, placing both of 
them in contrast with the Homeric epic. Such an internal analogy, 
in the absence of good testimony, is the best guide which we can 
follow in determining the date of the “Works and Days,” which 
we should accordingly place shortly after the year 700 B. c. The 
style of the poem might indeed afford a proof that the ancient and 
uniform hexameter, though well adapted to continuous legendary 
narrative or to solemn hymns, was somewhat monotonous when 
called upon either to serve a polemical purpose or to impress a 
striking moral lesson. When poets, then the only existing com- 
posers, first began to apply their thoughts to the cut and thrust 
of actual life, aggressive or didactic, the verse would be seen to 
require a new, livelier and smarter metre; and out of this want 
grew the elegiac and the iambic verse, both seemingly contempo- 
raneous, and both intended to supplant the primitive hexameter 
for the short effusions then coming into vogue. 





CHAPTERIII. 
LEGEND OF THE IAPETIDS. 


Tue sons of the Titan god Iapetus, as described in the Hesi- 
odic theogony, are Atlas, Mencetius, Prométheus and Epimétheus.! 
Of these, Atlas alone is mentioned by Homer in the Odyssey, 
and even he not as the son of Iapetus: the latter himself is named 
in the Iliad as existing in Tartarus along with Kronos. The 
Homeric Atlas “knows the depths of the whole sea, and keeps by 
himself those tall pillars which hold the heaven apart from the 
earth.” 2 





! Hesiod, Theog. 510. 

? Hom. Odyss. i. 120 — 
"AtAcvtoc Suyatip di06¢povoc, date Vakaconc 
Tidone Bévdea olde, Eyer 6€ Te kiovac abrd¢g — 
Maxpac, ai yaiay re kat obpavdv dudgic¢ Exovary. 

VOL. I. 


74 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


As the Homeric theogony generally appears much expanded 
in Hesiod, so also does the family of Iapetus, with their varied 
adventures. Atlas is here described, not as the keeper of the 
intermediate pillars between heaven and earth, but as himself 
condemned by Zeus to support the heaven on his head and hands;! 
while the fierce Mencetius is thrust down to Erebus as a punish- 
ment for his ungovernable insolence. But the remaining two 
brothers, Prométheus and Epimétheus, are among the most in 
teresting creations of Grecian legend, and distinguished in more 
than one respect from all the remainder. 

First, the main battle between Zeus and the Titan ssoth isa 
contest of force purely and simply — mountains are hurled and 
thunder is launched, and the victory remains tothe strongest. But 
the competition between Zeus and Prométheus is one of craft 
and stratagem: the victory does indeed remain to the former, but 
the honors of the fight belong to the latter. Secondly, Prométheus 
and Epimétheus (the fore-thinker and the after-thinker 2) are char- 
acters stamped at the same mint and by the same effort, the express 
contrast and antithesis of each other. Thirdly, mankind are here 
expressly brought forward, not indeed as active partners in the 
struggle, but as the grand and capital subjects interested, — as 
gainers or sufferers by the result. Prométheus appears in the 
exalted character of champion of the human race, even against 
the formidable superiority of Zeus. 

In the primitive or Hesiodic legend, Prométheus is not the 
creator or moulder of man; it is only the later additions which 
invest him with this character. ‘The race are supposed as exist- 





1 Hesiod, Theog. 516.— Le 
*Atiac 0° obpaviv ebpdv Exet Kparepinc tr’ ” dviayeng 
’Eornac, Kedadg te Kal dkapairovor yépecot. dis 
Hesiod stretches far beyond the simplicity of the Homeric conception: 

2 Pindar extends the family of Epimétheus and gives him a) daughter, 
Ilpégaorc (Pyth. v. 25), Excuse, the offspring of After-thought. 

3 Apollodér. i. 7.1. Nor is he such either in A’schylus, or in the Platonie 
fable (Protag. c. 30), though this version became at last the most popular. 
Some hardened lumps of clay, remnants of that which had been employed 
by Prométheus in moulding man, were shown to Pausanias at Panopeus in 
Phokis (Paus. x. 4, 3). 

The first Epigram of Erinna (Anthol. i. p. 58, ed. Brunck) seems te allude 


LEGEND OF THE IAPETIDS. 75 


ing, and Prométheus, a member of the dispossessed body of Titan 
gods, comes forward as their representative and defender. The 
advantageous bargain which he made with Zeus on their behalf, 
in respect to the partition of the sacrificial animals, has been re- 
counted in the preceding chapter. Zeus felt that he had been 
outwitted, and was exceeding wroth. In his displeasure he with- 
held from mankind the inestimable comfort of fire, so that the 
race would have perished, had not Prométheus stolen fire, in de- 
fiance of the command of the Supreme Ruler, and brought it to 
men in the hollow of a ferule.! 

Zeus was now doubly indignant, and determined to play off 
a still more ruinous stratagem. Héphestos, by his direction, 
moulded the form of a beautiful virgin; Athéné dressed her, 
Aphrodité and the Charities bestowed upon her both ornament 
and fascination, while Hermés infused into her the mind of a 
dog, a deceitful spirit, and treacherous words.2. The messenger 
of the gods conducted this “fascinating mischief” to mankind, at 
a time when Prométheus was not present. Now Epimétheus had 
received from his brother peremptory injunctions not to accept 
from the hands of Zeus any present whatever; but the beauty 
of Pandora (so the newly-formed female was called) was not to 
be resisted. She was received and admitted among men, and 
from that moment their comfort and tranquillity was exchanged 
for suffering of every kind. The evils to which mankind are 
liable had been before enclosed in a cask in their own keeping: 
Pandora in her malice removed the lid of the cask, and out flew 
these thousand evils and calamities, to exercise forever their de- 
stroying force. Hope alone remained imprisoned, and therefore 
without efficacy, as before — the inviolable lid being replaced 
before she could escape. Before this incident (says the legend) 
men had lived without disease or suffering; but now both earth 
and sea are full of mischiefs, while maladies of every description 
stalk abroad by day as well as by night,‘ without any hope for 
man of relief to come. 





to Prométheus as moulder of man. ‘The expression of Aristophanés (Aves, 
689) —Adouara x72.0d — does not necessarily refer to Prométheus. 
’ Hesiod, Theog. 566; Opp. Di. 52. * Theog. 580; Opp. Di. 50-85. 
3 Opp. Di. 81-90. 
* Opp. Di. 93. Pandéra does no’ bring with her the cask, as the common 


76 HISTORY OF GREu“CK. 


The Theogony gives the legend here recounted, with some ya 
riations — leaving out the part of Epimétheus altogether, as well 
as the cask of evils. Pandora is the ruin of man, simply as the 
mother and representative of the female sex.' And the varia- 
tions are thus useful, as they enable us to distinguish the essential 
from the accessory circumstances of the story. 

“Thus (says the poet, at the conclusion of his narrative) it is 
not possible to escape from the purposes of Zeus.”2 His mythe, 
connecting the calamitous condition of man with the malevolence 
of the supreme god, shows, first, by what cause such an unfriendly 
feeling was raised ; next, by what instrumentality its deadly re- 
sults were brought about. The human race are not indeed the 
creation, but the protected flock of Prométheus, one of the elder 
or dispossessed Titan gods: when Zeus acquires supremacy, man- 
kind along with the rest become subject to him, and are to make 
the best bargain they can respecting worship and service to be 
yielded. By the stratagem of their advocate Prométheus, Zeus 





tersion of this story would have us suppose: the cask exists fast closed in 
the custody of Epimétheus, or of man himself, and Pandéra commits the 
fatal treachery of removing the lid. The case is analogous to that of the 
closed bag of unfavorable winds which olus gives into the hands of 
Odysseus, and which the guilty companions of the latter force open, to the 
entire ruin of his hopes (Odyss. x. 19-50). The idea of the two casks on 
the threshhold of Zeus, lying ready for dispensation —-one full of evils the 
ather of benefits —is Homeric (Iliad, xxiv. 527):— 
Aoiot yap te ridot Karaketarat év Atdc ovdet, ete. 
Plutarch assimilates to this the xi3o¢ opened by Pandéra, Consolat. ad Apol- 
lon. c. 7. p. 105. The explanation here given of the Hesiodic passage re- 
lating to Hope, is drawn from an able article in the Wiener Jahrbucher, yol. 
109 (1845), p. 220, Ritter; a review of Schémmann’s translation of the Pro- 
métheus of Aischylus. The diseases and evils are inoperative so long as they 
remain shut up in the cask: the same mischief-making influence which lets 
them out to their calamitous work, takes care that Hope shall still continue 
a powerless prisoner in the inside. 
1 Theog. 590.— 

"EK tig yap yévog éott yuvatkGy Sndvrepaor, | 

The yap bAdiéy bore yévoc Kat GiAa yuvatkov 

Iljpa péya Svytoiot per’ dvdpaor vareraover, ete. 

*Opp Di 105— 
Obtu¢ obre rH at? Atdc voor taréaoVat. 


ZEUS AND PROMETHEUS, 77 


is cheated into such a partition of the victims as is eminently un- 
profitable to him ; whereby his wrath is so provoked, that he tries 
to subtract from man the use of fire. Here however his scheme 
is frustrated by the theft of Prométheus: but his second attempt 
is more successful, and he in his turn cheats the unthinking Epimé- 
theus into the acceptance of a present (in spite of the peremptory 
interdict of Prométheus) by which the whole of man’s happiness 
is wrecked. This legend grows out of two feelings; partly as to 
the relations of the gods with man, partly as to the relation of 
the female sex with the male. The present gods are unkind to- 
wards man, but the old gods, with whom man’s lot was originally 
cast, were much kinder—and the ablest among them stands for- 
ward as the indefatigable protector of the race. Nevertheless, 
the mere excess of his craft proves the ultimate ruin of the cause 
which he espouses. He cheats Zeus out of a fair share of the 
sacrificial victim, so as both to provoke and justify a retaliation 
which he cannot be always at hand to ward off: the retaliation 
is, in his absence, consummated by a snare laid for Epimétheus 
and voluntarily accepted. And thus, though Hesiod ascribes the 
calamitous condition of man to the malevolence of Zeus, his piety 
suggests two exculpatory pleas for the latter: mankind have been 
the first to defraud Zeus of his legitimate share of the sacrifice — 
and they have moreover been consenting parties to their own 
ruin. Such are the feelings, as to the relation between the gods 
and man, which have been one of the generating elements of 
this legend. The other element, a conviction of the vast mischief 
arising to man from women, whom yet they cannot dispense with, 
is frequently and strongly set forth in several of the Greek poets 
—by Simonidés of Amorgos and Phokylidés, not less than by 
the notorious misogynist Euripidés. - 

But the miseries arising from woman, however great they 
might be, did not reach Prométheus himself. For him,the rash 
champion who had ventured “to compete in sagacity”! with 
Zeus, a different punishment was in store. Bound by heavy 
chains to a pillar, he remained fast imprisoned for several gene- 
rations: every day did an eagle prey upon his liver, and every 
night did the liver grow afresh for the next day’s suffering. At 





?Theog 534. Obvex’ épivero Bovadg breppevét Cpoviavn 


78 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


length Zeus, eager to enhance the glory of his favorite son Héras 
clés, permitted “the latter to kill the eagle and rescue the — 
tive.! 

Such is the Prométhean mythe as it stands in the Hesiodie¢ 
poems; its earliest form, as far as we can trace. Upon it was founded 
the sublime tragedy of schylus, “The Enchained Prométheus,” 
together with at least one more tragedy, now lost, by the same 
author.2 Aus*hylus has made several important alterations; de- 
scribing the human race, not as having once enjoyed and subse- 
quently lost a state of tranquillity and enjoyment, but as originally 
feeble and wretched. He suppresses both the first trick played 
off by Prométheus upon Zeus respecting the partition of the vic- 
tim — and the final formation and sending of Pandéra — which 
are the two most marked portions of the Hesiodie story; while 
on the other hand he brings out prominently and enlarges upon 
the theft of fire,3 which in Hesiod is but slightly touched. If he 
has thus relinquished the antique simplicity of the story, he has 
rendered more than ample compensation by imparting to it a gran- 
deur of idéal, a large reach of thought combined with appeals to 
our earnest and admiring sympathy, and a pregnancy of sugges- 
tion in regard to the relations between the gods and man, which 
soar far above the Hesiodic level — and which render his tragedy 
the most impressive, though not the most artistically composed, of 
all Grecian dramatic productions. Prométheus there appears not 
only as the heroic champion and sufferer in the cause and for the 
protection of the human race, but also as the gifted teacher of all the 
arts, helps, and ornaments of life, amongst which fire is only one #4 
all this against the will and in defiance of the purpose of Zeus, who, 
on acquiring his empire, wished to destroy the human race and to 





1 Theog. 521-532. 

* Of the tragedy called Upoundede Avouevoc some few fragments yet re 
muin: Ipountede Tlipdopog was a satyric drama, according to Dindorf 
Welcker recognizes a third tragedy, Tpoudede Tlipdopoc, and a satyric bei 
ma, IIpounded¢ Ivpxaebc (Die Griechisch. Tragédien, vol. i. p. 30). 
story of Prométheus had also been handled by Sapphéd in one of her ie 
songs (Servius ad Virgil. Eclog. vi. 42). 

® Apollodérus .oo mentions only the theft of fire (i. 7. 1). 

* Asch. Prom. 442-506.— 
Tldoat réyvat Bporoioww éx popndéwg. 


PROMETHEUS AND HIS SUFFERINGS. 73 


beget some new breed.! Moreover, new relations between Promé- 
theus and Zeus are superadded by Aéschylus. At the commence- 
ment of the struggle between Zeus and the Titan gods, Prométheus 
had vainly attempted to prevail upon the latter to conduct it with 
prudence; but when he found that they obstinately declined all 
wise counsel, and that their ruin was inevitable, he abandoned their 
causeand joined Zeus. To him and to his advice Zeus owed the 
victory : yet the monstrous ingratitude and tyranny of the latter is 
now manifested by nailing him to a rock, for no other crime than 
because he frustrated the purpose of extinguishing the human race, 
and furnished to them the means of living with tolerable comfort.2 
The new ruler Zeus, insolent with his victory over the old gods, 
tramples down all right, and sets at naught sympathy and obliga- 
tion, as well towards gods as towards man. Yet the prophetic 
Prométheus, in the midst of intense suffering, is consoled by the 
foreknowledge that the time will come when Zeus must again 
send for him, release him, and invoke his aid, as the sole means 
of averting from himself dangers otherwise insurmountable. The 
security and means of continuance for mankind have now been 
placed beyond the reach of Zeus— whom Prométheus proudly 
defies, glorying in his generous and successful championship,? de- 
spite the terrible price which he is doomed to pay for it. 

_ As the ZEschylean Prométheus, though retaining the old linea- 
ments, has acquired a new coloring, soul and character, so-he has 
also become identified with a special locality. In Hesiod, there 
is no indication of the place in which he is imprisoned ; but Ais- 
chylus places it in Scythia,‘ and the general belief of the Greeks 
supposed it to be on Mount Caucasus. So long and so firmly did 





1 Fisch. Prom.231.— 
Bporav dé Téy tadatrapwv Adyov 
Ovx éoxev ovdév’, GAX’ dictooac yévog 
To ray, Expylev dAdo gtrica véov. 
* Asch. Prom. 198-222, 123.— 
ba tiv Aiav giAdryTa Bpotay. 

3 Zisch. Prom. 169-770. 

4 Prometh. 2. See also the Fragments of the Prométheus Solutus, 177~ 
179, ed. Dindorf, where Caucasus is specially named ; but v. 719 of the Pro- 
métheus Vinctus seems to imply that Mount Caucasus is a place different 
from that to which the suffering prisoner is chained. 


80 HISFORY OF GREECE. 


this belief continue, that the Roman general Pompey, when in 
command of an army in Kolchis, made with his companion, the lit- 
erary Greek Theophanés, a special march to view the spot in 
Caucasus where Prométheus had been transfixed.! 





CHAPTER IV. 


HEROIC LEGENDS.— GENEALOGY OF ARGOS. 


Havine briefly enumerated the gods of Greece, with their 
chief attributes as described in legend, we come to those geneal- 
ogies which connected them with historical men. 

In the retrospective faith of a Greek, the ideas of worship and 
ancestry coalesced. Every association of men, large or small, in 
whom there existed a feeling of present union, traced back that 
union to some common initial progenitor; that progenitor being 
either the common god whom they worshipped, or some semi-divine 
person closely allied to him. What the feelings of the commu- 
nity require is, a continuous pedigree to connect them with this 
respected source of existence, beyond which they do not think of 
looking back. A series of names, placed in filiation or fraternity, 
together with a certain number of family or personal adventures 
ascribed to some of the individuals among them, constitute the 
ante-historical past through which the Greek looks back to his 
gods. The names of this genealogy are, to a great degree, gen- 
tile or local names familiar to the people,— rivers, mountains, 
springs, lakes, villages, demes, etc..— embodied as persons, and 
introduced as acting or suffering. They are moreover called 
kings or chiefs, but the existence of a body of subjects surround- 
ing them is tacitly implied rather than distinctly set forth; for 
their own personal exploits or family proceedings constitute for 
the most part the whole matter of narrative. And thus the gene: 





1 Appian, Bell. Mithridat. c. 103. 


HEROIC LEGENDS.— GENEALOGY OF ARGOS. 81 


alogy was made to satisfy at once the appetite of the Greeks for 
romantic adventure, and their demand for an unbroken line of fil- 
iation between themselves and the gods. The eponymous person- 
age, from whom the community derive their name, is sometimes 
the begotten son of the local god, sometimes an indigenous man 
sprung from the earth, which is indeed itself divinized. 

It will be seen from the mere description of these genealogies 
that they included elements human and historical, as well as ele- 
ments divine and extra-historical. And if we could determine 
the time at which any genealogy was first framed, we should be able 
to assure ourselves that the men then represented as present, to- 
gether with their fathers and grandfathers, were real persons ot 
flesh and blood. But this is a point which can seldom be ascertain- 
ed ; moreover, even if it could be ascertained, we must at once set it 
aside, if we wish to look at the genealogy in the point of view of 
the Greeks. For to them, not only all the members were alike 
real, but the gods and heroes at the commencement were in a cer- 
tain sense the most real; at least, they were the most esteemed 
and indispensable of all. ‘The value of the genealogy consisted, 
not in its length, but in its continuity ; not (according to the feel- 
ing of modern aristocracy) in the power of setting out a prolong- 
ed series of human fathers and grandfathers, but in the sense of 
ancestral union with the primitive god. And the length of’ the 
series is traceable rather to humility, inasmuch as the sanie per- 
son who was gratified with the belief that he was descended from 
a god in the fifteenth generation, would have accounted it crimi- 
nal insolence to affirm that a god was his father or grandfather. 
In presenting to the reader those genealogies which constitute the 
supposed primitive history of Hellas, I make no pretence to dis- 
tinguish names real and historical from fictitious creations ; partly 
because I have no evidence upon which to draw the line, and part- 
ly because by attempting it I should altogether depart from the 
genuine Grecian point of view. 

Nor is it possible to do more than exhibit a certain selection of 
such as were most current and interesting; for the total number 
of them which found place in Grecian faith exceeds computation. 
As a general rule, every deme, every gens, every aggregate of 
men accustomed to combined action, religious or political, had its 
owp. The small and unimportant demeés into which Attica was 

VOL. I. 4* Goce. 


82 HISTORY Of GREECE. 


divided had each its ancestral god and heroes, just as much as 
the great Athens herself. Even among the villages of Phokis, 
which Pausanias will hardly permit himself to call towns, deduc- 
tions of legendary antiquity were not wanting. And it is impor- 
tant to bear in mind, when we are reading the legendary geneal- 
ogies of Argos, or Sparta, or Thébes, that these are merely 
samples amidst an extensive class, all perfectly analogous, and 
all exhibiting the religious and patriotic retrospect of some frac- 
tion of the Hellenic world. They are no more matter of his- 
torical tradition than any of the thousand other legendary genealo- 
gies which men delighted to recall to memory at the periodical 
festivals of their gens, their deme, or their village. 

With these few prefatory remarks, I proceed to notice the most 
conspicuous of the Grecian heroic pedigrees, and first, that of 
Argos. 

The earliest name in Argeian antiquity is that of Inachus, the 
son of Oceanus and 'Téthys, who gave his name to the river flow- 
ing under the walls of the town. According to the chronological 
computations of those who regarded the mythical genealogies as 
substantive history, and who allotted a given number of years to 
each generation, the reign of Inachus was placed 1986 B. ¢., or 
about 1100 years prior to the commencement of the recorded 
Olympiads.1 

The sons of Inachus were Phoréneus and Agialeus; both of 
whom however were sometimes represented as autochthonous 
men, the one in the territory of Argos, the other in that of Sik- 
yon. gialeus gave his name to the north-western region of 
the Peloponnésus, on the southern coast of the Corinthian Gulf? 
The name of Phor6éneus was of great celebrity in the Argeian 
mythical genealogies, and furnished both the title and the sub- 
ject of the ancient poem called Phoroénis, in which he is styled 
“the father of mortal men.”? He is said to have imparted to 





1 Apollodér. ii. 1. Mr. Fynes Clinton does not admit the historical reality 
of Inachus; but he places Phoréneus seventeen generations, or 570 years 
prior to the Trojan war, 978 years earlier than the first recorded Olympiad 
See Fasti Hellenici, vol. iii. c. 1. p. 19. 

® Pausan. ii. 5, 4. 

* See Diintzer, Fragm. Epic. Greece. p. 57. The Argeian author Akusilaus. 
treated Phoréneus as the first of men, Fragm. 14. Didot av. Clem. Alex 


10.—HERR.—THE HERZEO\. * 83 


mar.kind, who had before him lived altogether isolated, the first 
notion and habits of social existence, and even the first knowl- 
edge of fire: his dominion extended over the whole Peloponné- 
sus. His tomb at Argos, and seemingly also the place called the 
Phorénic city, in which he formed the first settlement of man- 
kind, were still shown in the days of Pausanias.!_ The offspring 
of Phoréneus, by the nymph Telediké, were Apis and Niobé. 
_ Apis, a harsh ruler, was put to death by Thelxién and Telchin, 
having given to Peloponnésus the name of Apia:2 he was suc- 
ceeded by~Argos, the son of his sister Niobé by the god Zeus. 
From this sovereign Peloponnésus was denominated Argos. By 
his wife Evadné, daughter of Strymon,? he had four sons, Ekba- 
sus, Peiras, Epidaurus, and Kriasus. Ekbasus was succeeded by 
his son Agénér, and he again by his son Argos Panoptés,—a 





Stromat. i. p. 321. Gopwriec, a synonym for Argeians; Theocrit. Idyll. 
xxv. 200. 

1 Apollodor. ii. 1, 1; Pausan. ii. 15,5; 19,5; 20, 3. 

? Apis in Aischylus is totally different: farpduavtig or medical charmer, 
son of Apollo, who comes across the gulf from Naupactus, purifies the ter- 
ritory of Argos from noxious monsters, and gives to it the name of Apia 
(ZEschyl. Suppl. 265). Compare Steph. Byz. v. ’Azin; Soph. C&dip. 
Colon. 1303. The name ’Azia for Peloponnésus remains still a mystery, 
even after the attempt of Buttmann (Lexilogus, s. 19) to throw light upon 
it. 

Eusebius asserts that Niobé was the wife of Inachus and mother: of Pho- 
roneus, and pointedly contradicts those who call her daughter of Phoréneus 
— dant dé tives Nto8nv Popwréwe eivar Svyatépa, brep odk dAndéc (Chronic. 
p. 23, ed. Scalig.): his positive tone is curious, upon such a matter. 

Hellanicus in his Argolica stated that Phoréneus had three sons, Pelasgus, 
Tasus and AgénSr, who at the death of their father divided his possessions 
by lot. Pelasgus acquired the country near the river Erasinus, and built the 
citadel of Larissa: Iasus obtained the portion near to Elis. After their 
decease, the younger brother Agénér invaded and conquered the country, at 
the head of a large body of horse. It was from these three persons that 
Argos derived three epithets which are attached to it in the Homeric 
poems —”Apyo¢ TeAacyexdv, “lacov, ‘Im76Borov (Hellanik. Fr. 38, ed. Didot; 
Phavorin. v."Apyoc). This is a specimen of the way in which legendary 
persons as well as legendary events were got up to furnish an explanation 
of Homeric epithets: we may remark as singular, that Hellanicus seems to 
apply [leAasy:xdv “Apyo¢g to a portion of Peloponnésus, while the Homeric 
Catalogue applies it to Thessaly. 

3 Apollod. 1. c. The mention of Strym6n seems connected with Aischylus 
Sappl. 255. 


84 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


very powerful prince who is said to have had eyes distributed 
over all his body, and to have liberated Peloponnésus from sev- 
eral monsters and wild animals which infested it :!1 Akusilaus and 
ZEschylus make this Argos an earth-born person, while Phere- 
kydés reports him as son of Arestér. Tasus was the son of Argos 
Panoptés by Isméné, daughter of Asépus. According to the 
authors whom Apollodorus and Pausanias prefer, the celebrated 
I6 was his daughter: but the Hesiodic epic (as well as Akusilaus) _ 
represented her as daughter of Peiras, while Auschylus and 
Kastor the chronologist affirmed the primitive king Inachus to 
have been her father.2 A favorite theme, as well for the ancient 
genealogical poets as for the Attic tragedians, were the adven- 
tures of I6, of whom, while priestess of Héré, at the ancient 
and renowned Heérezon between Mykénaw and Argos, Zeus 
became amorous. When Héré discovered the intrigue and 
taxed him with it, he denied the charge, and metamorphosed I6 
into a white cow. Heéré, requiring that the cow should be sur- 
rendered to her, placed her under the keeping of Argos Panop- 
tés; but this guardian was slain by Hermés, at the command of 
Zeus: and Héré then drove the cow I6 away from her native 
land by means of the incessant stinging of a gad-fly, which com- 
pelled her to wander without repose or sustenance over an 
immeasurable extent of foreign regions. The wandering I6 gave 
her name to the Ionian Gulf, traversed Epirus and Illyria, passed 
the chain of Mount Hemus and the lofty summits of Caucasus, 
and swam across the Thracian or Cimmerian Bosporus (which 
also from her derived its appellation) into Asia. She then went 
through Scythia, Cimmeria, and many Asiatic regions, until she 
arrived in Egypt, where Zeus at length bestowed upon her rest, 
restored her to her original form, and enabled her to give birth 
to his black son Epaphos.? 





' Akusil. Fragm. 17, ed. Didot; A®sch. Prometh. 568; Pherekyd. Fragm. 
22, ed. Didot; Hesiod. AXgimius. Fr. 2, p. 56, ed. Dintzer: among the 
varieties of the story, one was that Argos was changed into a peacock 
(Schol. Aristoph. Aves, 102). Macrobius (i. 19) considers Argos as an alle- 
gorical expression of the starry heaven; an idea which Panofska alsa 
upholds in one of the recent Abhandlungen of the Berlin Academy, 1837, p. 
121 seq. 

* Apollod. ii. 1,1; Pausan. ii. 16,1; Ausch. Prom. v. 590-663. 

? JEschyi. Prom. v. 790-850; Apollod. ii. 1. &schylus in the Supplices 


WANDERINGS OF 10. 85 


Such is a general sketch of the adventures which the aucieni 
poets, epic, lyric, and tragic, and the logographers after them, 
connect with the name of the Argeian I6,— one of the numerous 
tales which the fancy of the Greeks deduced from the amorous 
dispositions of Zeus and the jealousy of Héré. That the scene 
should be laid in the Argeian territory appears natural, when we 
recollect that both Argos and Mykénz were under the special 
guardianship of Héré, and that the Héraon between the two 
was one of the oldest and most celebrated temples in which she 
was worshipped. It is useful to compare this amusing fiction 
with the representation reportel] to us by Herodotus, and derived 
by him as well from Pheenician as from Persian antiquarians, of 
the circumstances which occasioned the transit of I6 from Argos 
to Egypt,—an event recognized by all of them as historical 
matter of fact. According to the Persians, a Pheenician vessel 
had arrived at the port near Argos, freighted with goods intended 
for sale to the inhabitants of the country. After the vessel had 
remained a few days, and disposed of most of her cargo, several 





gives a different version of the wanderings of I6 from that which appears in 
the Prométheus: in the former drama he carries her through Phrygia, Mysia, 
Lydia, Pamphylia and Cilicia into Egypt (Supplic. 544-566) : nothing is 
there said about Prométheus, or Caucasus or Scythia, etc. 

The track set forth in the Supplices is thus geographically intelligible . 
that in the Prométheus (though the most noticed of the two) defies.all com- 
prehension, even as a consistent fiction; nor has the erudition of the com- 
mentators been successful in clearing it up. See Schutz, Excurs. iv. ad 
Prometh. Vinct. pp. 144-149; Welcker, Auschylische Trilogie, pp. 127-146, 
and especially Véleker, Mythische Geographie der Griech. und Romer, part 
i. pp. 3-158. 

- The Greek inhabitants at Tarsus in Cilicia traced their origin to Argos: 
their story was, that Triptolemus had been sent forth from that town in 
quest of the wandering I6, that he had followed her to Tyre, and then 
renounced the search in despair. He and his companions then settled partly 
at Tarsus, partly at Antioch (Strabo, xiv. 675; xv. 750). This is the 
story of Kadmos and Eurdpé inverted, as happens so often with the Grecian 
mythes. 

Homer calls Hermés ’Apyecdévrn¢; but this epithet hardly affords sufh 
cient proof that he was acquainted with the mythe of I6, as Vélcker sup 
poses : it cannot be traced higher than Hesiod. According to some authors, 
whom Cicero copies, it was on account of the murder of Argos that Hermés 
was obliged to leave Greece and go into Egypt: then it was that he tangh, 
the Egyptians laws and letters (1)e Natur. Deor. iii. 22). 


86 HISTORY Ol’ GREECE. 


Argeian women, and among them I6 the king’s daughter, coming 
on board to purchase, were seized and carried off by the crew, 
who sold I6 in Egypt.!. The Pheenician antiquarians, however, 
while they admitted the circumstance that I6 had left her own 
country in one of their vessels, gave a different color to the whole 
by affirming that she emigrated voluntarily, having been engaged 
in an amour with the captain of the vessel, and fearing that her 
parents might come to the knowledge of her pregnancy. Both 
Persians and Phoenicians described the abduction of I6 as the 
first of a series of similar acts between Greeks and Asiatics, 
committed each in revenge for the preceding. First came the 
rape of Eurépé from Pheenicia by Grecian adventurers, — per- 
haps, as Herodotus supposed, by Krétans: next, the abduction 
of Médeia from Kolchis by Jason, which occasioned the retaliatory 
act of Paris, when he stole away Helena from Menelaos. Up to 
this point the seizures of women by Greeks from <Asiatics, and 
by Asiatics from Greeks, had been equivalents both in number 
and in wrong. But the Greeks now thought fit to equip a vast 
conjoint expedition to recover Helen, in the course of which they 
took and sacked Troy. The invasions of Greece by Darius and 
Xerxes were intended, according to the Persian antiquarians, as 
a long-delayed retribution for the injury inflicted on the Asiatics 
by Agamemnon and his followers.2 

The account thus given of the adventures of I6, when con- 
trasted with the genuine legend, is interesting, as it tends to illus- 





1 The story in Parthénius (Narrat. 1) is built upon this version of 16’s 
adventures. oz 

2 Herodot. i. 1-6. Pausanias (ii. 15, 1) will not undertake to determine 
whether the account given by Herodotus, or that of the old legend, respect- 
ing the cause which carried 16 from Argos to Egypt, is the true one: Ephorus 
(ap. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. ii. 168) repeats the abduction of I6 to Egypt, by the 
Vheenicians, subjoining a strange account of the Etymology of the name 
Bosporus. The remarks of Plutarch on the narrative of Herodotus are 
curious : he adduces as one proof of the xaxo7Sera (bad feeling) of Herod: 
otus, that the latter inserts so discreditable a narrative respecting 16, daugh- 
ter of Inachus, “ whom all Greeks believe to have been divinized by foreign- 
ers, to have given name to seas and straits, and to be the source of the most 
illustrious regal families.” He also blames Herodotus for rejecting Epaphus, 
¥é, Iasus and Argos, as highest members of the Perseid genealogy. He 
calls Herodotus ¢:A08apBapo¢ (Plutarch, De Malign. Herodoti, c. xi. xii. xiv 
pp. 856, 857). 


ABDUCTIONS OF HEROIC WOMEN. 87 


trate the phenomenon which early Grecian history is constantly 
presenting to us, —- the way in which the epical furniture of an 
unknown past is recast and newly colored so as to meet those 
changes which take place in the retrospective feelings of the 
present. The religious and poetical character of the old legend 
disappears: nothing remains except the names of persons and 
places, and the voyage from Argos to Egypt: we have in exchange 
a sober, quasi-historical narrative, the value of which consists in 
its bearing on the grand contemporary conflicts between Persia 
and Greece, which filled the imagination of Herodotus and his 
readers. 

To proceed with the genealogy of the kings of Argos, Iasus 
was succeeded by Krotépus, son of his brother Agénér; Kroté- 
pus by Sthenelas, and he again by Gelanér.! In the reign of the 
latter, Danaos came with his fifty daughters from Egypt to 
Argos; and here we find another of those romantic adventures 
which so agreeably decorate the barrenness of the mythical gen- 
ealogies. Danaos and Aigyptos were two brothers descending 
from Epaphos, son of 16: A®gyptos had fifty sons, who were 
eager to marry the fifty daughters of Danaos, in spite of the 
strongest repugnance of the latter. To escape such a necessity, 
Danaos placed his fifty daughters on board of a penteconter (or 
vessel with fifty oars) and sought refuge at Argos; touching in 
his voyage at the island of Rhodes, where he erected a statue of 
Athéné at Lindos, which was long exhibited as a memorial of his 





1 It would be an unprofitable fatigue to enumerate the multiplied and irre- 
concilable discrepancies in regard to every step of this old Argeian geneal- 
ogy. Whoever desires to see them brought together, may consult Schubart, 
Queestiones in Antiquitatem Heroicam, Marpurg, 1832, capp. 1 and 2. 

The remarks which Schubart makes (p. 35) upon Petit-Radel’s Chrono- 
logical Tables will be assented to by those who follow.the unceasing string 
of contradictions, without any sufficient reason to believe that any one of 
them is more worthy of trust than the remainder, which he has cited: — 
“ Videant alii, qaomodo genealogias heroicas, et chronologiz rationes, in 
concordiam redigant. Ipse abstineo, probe persuasus, stemmata vera, his- 
toriz fide comprobata, in systema chronologiw redigi posse: at ore per 
sxcula tradita, a poctis reficta, seepe mutata, prout fabula postulare xideba 
tur, ab historiarum deinde conditoribus restituta, scilicet, brevi, qualia 
prostant stemmata — chronologix secundum «nnos distribute vincul: semper 


recusatura esse.” 


88 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


passage. /Egyptos and his sons followed them to Argos and still 
pressed their suit, to which Danaos found himself compelled to 
assent; but on the wedding night he furnished each of his daugh- 
ters with a dagger, and enjoined them to murder their husbands 
during the hour of sleep. His orders were obeyed by all, with 
the single exception of Hypermnéstra, who preserved her hus- 
band Lynkeus, incurring displeasure and punishment from her 
father. He afterwards, however, pardoned her; and when, by 
the voluntary abdication of Gelanér, he became king of Argos, 
Lynkeus was recognized as his son-in-law and ultimately suc- 
ceeded him. The remaining daughters, having been purified by 
Athéné and Hermés, were given in marriage to the victors in a 
gymnic contest publicly proclaimed. From Danaos was derived 
the name of Danai, applied to the inhabitants of the Argeian 
territory,! and to the Homeric Greeks generally. 

From the legend of the Danaides we pass to two barren names 
of kings, Lynkeus and his son Abas. The two sons of Abas 
were Akrisios and Proetos, who, after much dissension, divided 
between them the Argeian territory; Akrisios ruling at Argos, 
and Preetos at Tiryns. The families of both formed the theme 
of romantic stories. ‘To pass over for the present the legend of 
Bellerophén, and the unrequited passion which the wife of Proetos 
conceived for him, we are told that the daughters of Preetos, 
beautiful, and solicited in marriageby suitors from all Greece; 
were smitten with leprosy and driven mad, wandering in unseemly 
guise throughout Peloponnésus. The visitation had overtaken 
them, according to Hesiod, because they refused to take part in 
the Bacchic rites; according to Pherekydés and the Argeian 
Akusilaus,? because they had treated scornfully the wooden statue 





1 Apollod. ii. 1. The Supplices of /&schylus is the commencing drama 
of a trilogy on this subject of the Danaides, —‘Ixerides, Alyimriot, Aavai- 
dec. Welcker, Griechisch. Tragédien, vol. i. p. 48: the two latter are lost. 
The old epic poem called Danats or Danaides, which is mentioned in the 
Tabula Iliaca as containing 5000 verses, has perished, and is unfortunately 

. very little alluded to: see Dintzer, Epic. Grec. Fragm. p. 3; Welcker, Der 
Episch. Kyklus, p. 35. 

# Apollod. 1.¢.; Pherekyd. ap. Schol. Hom. Odyss. xv. 225; Hesiod, 
Fragm. Marktsch. Fr. 36, 37,38. ‘These Fragments belong to the Hesiodie 
Catalogue of Women: Apollodérus seems to refer to some other of the 
numerous Hesiodic poems. Diodérus (iv. 68) assigns the angerof l)iony 
sos as the cause. 


DANAE AND PERSEUS. 89 


and simple equipments of Héré: the religious character of the 
old legend here displays itself in a remarkable manner. Unable 
to cure his daughters, Proetos invoked the aid of the renowned 
Pylian prophet and leech, Melampus son of Amythaén, who 
undertook to remove the malady on condition of being rewarded 
with the third part of the kingdom. Prcetos indignantly refused 
these conditious: but the state of his daughters becoming agegra- 
vated and intolerable, he was compelled again to apply to 
Melampus ; who, on the second request, raised his demands still 
higher, and required another third of the kingdom for his brother 
Bias. These terms being acceded to, he performed his part of 
the covenant. He appeased the wrath of Héré by prayer and 
sacrifice; or, according to another account, he approached the 
deranged women at the head of a troop of young men, with 
shouting and ecstatic dance, — the ceremonies appropriate to the 
Bacchie worship of Dionysos, — and in this manner effected their 
eure. Melampus, a name celebrated in many different Grecian 
mythes, is the legendary founder and progenitor of a great and 
long-continued family of prophets. He and his brother Bias 
became kings of separate portions of the Argeian territory: he 
is recognized as ruler there even in the Odyssey, and the prophet 
Theoklymenos, his grandson, is protected and carried to Ithaca 
by Telemachus.! Herodotus also alludes to the cure of the 
women, and to the double kingdom of Melampus and Bias-in the 
Argeian land: he recognizes Melampus as the first person who 
introduced to the knowledge of the Greeks the name and wor- 
ship of Dionysos, with its appropriate sacrifices and phallic pro- 
cessions. Here again he historicizes various features of the old 
legend in a manner not unworthy of notice.? 

But Danaé, the daughter of Akrisios, with her son Perseus 





1 Odyss. xv. 240-256. 

* Herod. ix. 34; ii. 49: compare Pausan. ii. 18,4. Instead of the Pre- 
tides, or daughters of Proetos, it is the Argeian women generally whom he 
represents Melampus as having cured, and the Argeians generally who send 
to Pylus to invoke his aid: the heroic personality which pervades the prim- 
itive story las disappeared. 

Kallimachus notices the Preetid virgins as the parties suffering from 
madness, but he treats Artemis as the healing influence (Hymn. ad Dianam 


235). 


90 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


acquired still greater celebrity than her cousins the Preetides 
An oracle had apprized Akrisios that his daughter would give 
birth to a son by whose hand he would himself be slain. To 
guard against this danger, he imprisoned Danaé in a chamber of 
brass under ground. But the god Zeus had become amorous of 
her, and found means to descend through the roof in the form of 
a shower of gold: the consequence of his visits was the birth of 
Perseus. When Akrisios discovered that his daughter had given 
existence to a son, he enclosed both the mother and the child in a 
coffer, which he cast into the sea.!. The coffer was carried to the 
isle of Seriphos, where Diktys, brother of the king Polydektés, 
fished it up, and rescued both Danaé and Perseus. The exploits 
of Perseus, when he grew up, against the three Phorkides or 
daughters of Phorkys, and the three Gorgons, are among the 
most marvellous and imaginative in all Grecian legend: they 
bear a stamp almost Oriental. I shall not here repeat the details 
of those unparalleled hazards which the special favor of Athéné en- 
abled him to overcome, and which ended in his bringing back from 
Libya the terrific head of the Gorgon Medusa, endued with the 
property of turning every one who looked upon it into stone. In 
his return, he rescued Andromeda, daughter of Képheus, who 
had been exposed to be devoured by a sea-monster, and brought 
her back as his wife. Akrisios trembled to see him after this 
victorious expedition, and retired into Thessaly to avoid him ; but 
Perseus followed him thither, and having succeeded in calming 
his apprehensions, became competitor in a gymnie contest where 
his grandfather was among the spectators. By an incautious 
swing of his quoit, he unintentionally struck Akrisios, and caused 
his death: the predictions of the oracle were thus at last fulfilled. 
Stung with remorse at the catastrophe, and unwilling to return to 
Argos, which had been the principality of Akrisios, Perseus 
made an exchange with Megapenthés, son of Preetos king of 
Tiryns. Megapenthés became king of Argos, and Perseus of 
Tiryns: moreover, the latter founded, within ten miles of Argos, 
the far-famel city of Mykénz. The massive walls of this city, 





1 The beautiful fragment of Simonidés (Fragm. vii. ed. Gaisford. Poet. 
Min.), describing Danaé and the child thus exposed. is familiar to every 
elassical reacler. 


PERSEIDS AT MYKENA. 91 


like those of Tiryns, of which remains are yet to be seen, were 
built for him by the Lykian Cyclépes.! J 

We here reach the commencement of the Perseid dynasty of 
Mykénx. It should he noticed, however, that there were among 
the ancient legends contradictory accounts of the foundation of 
this city. Both the Odyssey and the Great Eoiai enumerated, 
among the heroines, Mykéné, the Eponyma of the city; the 
former poem classifying her with Tyré and Alkméné, the latter 
describing her as the daughter of Inachus and wife of Arestdr. 
And Akusilaus mentioned an Eponymus Mykéneus, the son of 
Spart6n and grandson of Phoréneus.? 

The prophetic family of Melampus maintained itself in one 
of the three parts of the divided Argeian kingdom for five gene- 
rations, down to Amphiaraos and his sons Alkmzon and Amphi 
lochos. ‘The dynasty of his brother Bias, and that of Megapen- 
thés, son of Preetos, continued each for four generations: a list 
of barren names fills up the interval The Perseids of Mykéne 
boasted a descent long and glorious, heroic as well as historical, 
continuing down to the last.sovereigns of Sparta. The issue of 
Perseus was numerous: his son Alkzos was father of Amphi- 
try6n; another of his sons, Elektry6n, was father of Alkméné ;> a 
third, Sthenelos, father of Eurystheus. 

After the death of Perseus, Alkzeos and Amphitry6n dwelt at 
Tiryns. The latter became engaged in a quarrel with Elektryon 





1 Pans. ii. 15,4; ii. 16,5. Apollod. ii. 2. Pherekyd. Fragm. 26, Dind. 

®? Odyss. ii. 120. Hesiod. Fragment. 154. Marktscheff. — Akusil. Fragm, 
16. Pausan. ii. 16,4. Hekatzeus derived the name of the town from the 
uoxne of the sword of Perseus (Fragm. 360, Dind.). The Schol. ad Eurip. 
Orest. 1247, mentions Mykéneus as son of Spartén, but grandson of Phégeus 
the brother of Phoréneus. 

? Pausan. ii. 18, 4. 4 Herodot. vi. 53. 

5 In the Hesiodic Shield of Héraklés, Alkméné is distinctly mentioned as 
daughter of Elektryén; the genealogical poet, Asios, called her the daugh- 
ter of Amphiaracs and Eriphyle (Asii Fragm. 4, ed. Markt. p. 412).' The 
date of Asios cannot be precisely fixed; but he may be probably assigned to 
an epoch between the 30th and 40th Olympiad. 

Asios must have adopted a totally different legend respecting the birth 
of Héraklés and the circumstances preceding it, among which the deaths of 
her father and brothers are highly influential. Nor conld he have accepted 
the received chronology of the sieges of Thébes and Troy. 





92 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


respecting cattle, and in a fit of passion killed him :! moreover 
the piratical Taphians from the west coast of Akarnania invaded 
the country, and slew the sons of Elektry6n, so that Alkméné 
alone was left of that family. She was engaged to wed Amphi- 
tryén; but she bound him by oath not to consummate the mar- 
riage until he had avenged upon the Télebox the death of her 
brothers. Amphitryén, compelled to flee the country as the 
murderer of his uncle, took refuge in Thébes, whither Alkméné 
accompanied him: Sthenelos was left in possession of Tiryns. 
The Kadmeians of Thébes, together with the Locrians and Pho- 
cians, supplied Amphitry6n with troops, which he conducted 
against the Télebox and the Taphians:* yet he could not have 
subdued them without the aid of Komethé, daughter of the 
Taphian king Pterelaus, who conceived a passion for him, and 
cut off from her father’s head the golden lock to which Poseidon 
had attached the gift of immortality.3 Having conquered and 
expelled his enemies, Amphitryén returned to Thébes, impatient 
to consummate his marriage: but Zeus on the wedding-night 
assumed his form and visited Alkméné before him: he had deter- 
mined to produce from her a son superior to all his prior offspring, 
— “aspecimen of invincible force both to gods and men.”4 At the 
proper time, Alkméné was delivered of twin sons: Héraklés 
the offspring of Zeus,—the inferior and unhonored Iphiklés, 
offspring of Amphitryén.5 

When Alkméné was on the point of being delivered at Thébes, 
Zeus publicly boasted among the assembled gods, at the instiga- 
tion of the mischief-making Até, that there was on that day about 





1 So runs the old legend in the Hesiodic Shield of Héraklés (12-82), 
Apollodérus (or Pherekydés, whom he follows) softens it down, and repre- 
sents the death of Elektryén as accidentally caused by Amphitryén. 
(Apollod. ii. 4,6. Pherekydés, Fragm. 27, Dind.) 

2 Hesiod, Scut. Herc. 24. Theocrit. Idyll. xxiv. 4. Teleboas, the Epo- 
nym of these marauding people, was son of Poseidén (Anaximander ap. 
Athene. xi. p. 498). 

* Apollod. ii. 4,7. Compare the fable of Nisus at Megara, infra, chap 
xii. p. 362. 

* Hesiod, Scut. Here, 29. dpa Veoicw ’Avdpdo. tv dAgroriow dpe 
éAxrijpa dureton. 

® Hesiod. Sc. H. 50-56. 


ZEUS. — ALKMENE. — HERAKLES. 93 


to be born on earth, from his breed, a son who should rule over 
all his neighbors. Héré treated this as an empty boast, calling 
upon him to bind himself by an irremissible oath that the pre- 
diction should be realized. Zeus incautiously pledged his sol- 
emn word; upon which Héré darted swiftly down from Olympus 
to the Achaic Argos, where the wife of Sthenelos (son of Per- 
seus, and therefore grandson of Zeus) was already seven months 
gone with child. By the aid of the Eileithyiz, the special god- - 
desses of parturition, she caused Eurystheus, the son of Sthene- 
los, to be born before his time on that very day, while she 
retarded the delivery of Alkméné. Then returning to Olympus, 
she announced the fact to Zeus: “The good man Eurystheus, 
son of the Perseid Sthenelos, is this day born of thy loins: the 
sceptre of the Argeians worthily belongs to him.” Zeus was 
thunderstruck at the consummation which he had improvidently 
bound himself to accomplish. He seized Até his evil counsellor 
by the hair, and hurled her forever away from Olympus: but he 
had no power to avert the ascendency of Eurystheus and the 
servitude of Héraklés. “Many a pang did he suffer, when he 
saw his favorite son going through his degrading toil in the tasks 
imposed upon him by Eurystheus.”! 

_ The legend, of unquestionable antiquity, here transcribed from 
the Iliad, is one of the most pregnant and characteristic in the 
Grecian mythology. It explains, according to the religious ideas 
familiar to the old epic poets, both the distinguishing attributes 
and the endless toil and endurances of Héraklés, —the most 
renowned and most ubiquitous of all the semi-divine personages 
worshipped by the Hellénes,—a being of irresistible force, and 
especially beloved by Zeus, yet condemned constantly to labor 
for others and to obey the commands of a worthless and cowardly 
persecutor. His recompense is reserved to the close of his career, 
when his afflicting trials are brought to a close: he is then 
admitted to the godhead and receives in marriage Hébé.2 The 





- Homer, Iliad, xix. 90-133 ; also viii. 361. — 


Thy alet orevaxecy’, &Y bdv didov vidv édpero 
"Epyov detkéc éxovta, bn’ Eipvadijoc dé0Awv. 


* Hesiod, Theogon. 951, reAéoac orovéevtag débAove. Hom. Odyss. xi. 
620; Hesiod, Ee, Fragm. 24, Diintzer, p. 36, movnodrarov Kai dpiorey 


94 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


twelve labors, as they are called, too notorious to be here detailed, 
form a very small fraction of the exploits of this mighty being, 
which filled the Hérakleian epics of the ancient poets. He is 
found not only in most parts of Hellas, but throughout all the 
:+her regions then known to the Greeks, from Gadés to the river 
Thermod6n in the Euxine and to Scythia, overcoming all diffi- 
culties and vanquishing all opponents. Distinguished families 
are everywhere to be traced who bear his patronymic, and glory in 
the belief that they are his descendants. Among Achwans, Kad- 
meians, and Dorians, Héraklés is venerated: the latter especially 
‘reat him as their principal hero, —the Patron Hero-God of the 
race: the Hérakleids form among all Dorians a privileged gens, 
in which at Sparta the special lineage of the two kings was 
included. 

His character lends itself to mythes countless in number as 
well as disparate in their character. The irresistible force 
remains constant, but it is sometimes applied with reckless vio- 
lence against friends as well as enemies, sometimes devoted to 
the relief of the oppressed. The comic writers often brought 
him out as a coarse and stupid glutton, while the Athénian phi- 
losopher Prodikos, without at all distorting the type, extracted 
from it the simple, impressive, and imperishable apologue still 
known as the Choice of Hercules. 

After the death and apotheosis of Héraklés, his son Hyllos 
and his other children were expelled and persecuted by Eurys- 
theus: the fear of his vengeance deterred both the Trachinian 
king Kéyx and the Thébans from harboring them, and the 
Athénians alone were generous enough to brave the risk of offer- 
ing them shelter. Eurystheus invaded Attica, but perished in 
the attempt by the hand of Hyllos, or by that of Tolaos, the old 
companion and nephew of Héraklés.1. The chivalrous courage 
which the Athénians had on this occasion displayed in behalf of 
oppressed innocence, was a favorite theme for subsequent eulogy 
by Attic poets and orators. 

All the sons of Eurystheus lost their lives in the battle along 
with him, so that the Perseid family was now represented only 
by the Hérakleids, who collected an army and endeavored to 





* Apollod. ii. 8,1 He:atex. ap. Longin. c. 27; Diodér. iv. 5? 


EXILE OF THE HERAKLEIDS. 95 


recover the possessions from which they had been expelled. The 
united forces of Iénians, Achzans, and Arcadians, then inhabit- 
ing Peloponnésus, met the invaders at the isthmus, when Hyllos, 
the eldest of the sons of Héraklés, proposed that the contest 
should be determined by a single combat between himself and 
any champion of the opposing army. It was agreed, that if 
Hyllos were victorious, the Hérakleids should be restored to 
their possessions —if he were vanquished, that they should 
forego all claim for the space of a hundred years, or fifty years, 
or three generations,—for in the specification of the time, 
accounts differ. EXchemos, the hero of Tegea in Arcadia, ac- 
cepted the challenge, and Hyllos was slain in the encounter ; in 
consequence of which the Hérakleids retired, and resided along 
with the Dérians under the protection of ASgimios, son of Dorus.! 
As soon as the stipulated period of truce had expired, they 
renewed their attempt upon Peloponnésus conjointly with the 
Dérians, and with complete success: the great Dérian establish- 
ments of Argos, Sparta, and Messénia were the result. The 
details of this victorious invasion will be hereafter recounted. 

Sikyon, Phlios, Epidauros, and Trezen? all boasted of 
respected eponyms and a genealogy of dignified length, not 
exempt from the usual discrepancies—but all just as much 
entitled to a place on the tablet of history as the more renowned 
J®olids or Hérakleids. I omit them here because I wish to 
impress upon the reader’s mind the salient features and character 
of the legendary world,—not to load his memory with a full 
list of legendary names. 





1 Herodot. ix. 26; Dioddr. iv. 58. 

2 Pausan. ii. 5,5; 12,5; 26,3. His statements indicate how much the 
predominance of a powerful neighbor like Argos tended to alter the geneal, 
pgies cf these inferior towns. 


96 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


CHAPTER V. 
DEUKALION, HELLEN, AND SONS OF HELLEN. 


In the Hesiodic Theogony, as well as in the “ Works and 
Days,” the legend of Prométheus and Epimétheus presents an 
import religious, ethical, and social, and in this sense it is carried 
forward by Auschylus; but to neither of the characters is any 
genealogical function assigned. The Hesiodic Catalogue of 
Women brought both of them into the stream of Grecian legend- 
ary lineage, representing Deukalién as the son of Prométheus 
and Pandora, and seemingly his wife Pyrrha as daughter of 
Epimétheus.! 

Deukalién is important in Grecian mythical narrative under 
two points of view. First, he is the person specially saved at 
the time of the general deluge: next, he is the father of Hellén, 
the great eponym of the Hellenic race; at least this was the 
more current story, though there were other statements which 
made Hellén the son of Zeus. 

The name of Deukalién is originally connected with the 
Lokrian towns of Kynos and Opus, and with the race of the 
Leleges, but he appears finally as settled in Thessaly, and ruling 
in the portion of that country called Phthidtis.2 According to 
what seems to have been the old legendary account, it is the 





1 Schol. ad Apollén, Rhod. iii. 1085. Other accounts of the genealogy 
of Deukalién are given in the Schol. ad Homer. Odyss. x. 2, on the author 
ity both of Hesiod and Akusilaus. 

2 Hesiodic Catalog. Fragm. xi.; Gaisf. lxx. Dintzer— 


*Hror yap Aokpd¢ Acdéywv hynoaro Aadv, 
Totc pa more Kpovidne Zedc, dgdita ujdea eidcc, 
Aextovdc¢ é« yaing Adag nope Aevkadiurt. 


The reputed lineage of Deukalién continued in Phthia down to the time 
of Dikwarchus, if we may judge from the old Phthiot Pherekratés, whom 
he introduced in one of his dialogues as a disputant, and whom he expressly 
announced as a descendant of Deukalién (Cicero, Tuscul. Disp. i. 10). 


DEUKALION, HELLEN AND SONS OF HELLEN. 97 


deluge which transferred him from the one to the other; but ac- 
cording to another statement, framed in more historicizing times, 
he conducted a body of Kurétes and Leleges into Thessaly, and 
expelled the prior Pelasgian occupants.! 

The enormous iniquity with which earth was contaminated — 
as Apollodorus says, by the then existing brazen race, or as 
others say, by the fifty monstrous sons of Lykadn — provoked 
Zeus to send a general deluge.2 An unremitting and terrible 
rain laid the whole of Greece under water, except the highest 
mountain-tops, whereon a few stragglers found refuge. Deuka- 
lion was saved in a chest or ark, which he had been forewarned 
by his father Prométheus to construct. After floating for nine 
days on the water, he at length landed on the summit of Mount 
Parnassus. Zeus having sent Hermés to him, promising to grant 
whatever he asked, he prayed that men and companions might 
bé sent to him in his solitude: accordingly Zeus directed both 
him and Pyrrha to cast stones over their heads: those cast by 
Pyrrha became women, those by Deukalién men. And thus the 
“stony race of men” (if we may be allowed to translate an ety- 
mology which the Greek language presents exactly, and which 
has not been disdained by Hesiod, by Pindar, by Epicharmus, 
and by Virgil) came to tenant the soil of Greece. Deukalién 





! The latter account is given by Dionys. Halic. i. 17; the former seems to 
have been given by Hellanikus, who affirmed that the ark after the deluge 
stopped upon Mount Othrys, and not upon Mount Parnassus (Schol. Pind. 
ut. sup.) the former being suitable for a settlement in Thessaly. 

Pyrrha is the eponymous heroine of Pyrrhza or Pyrrha, the ancient name 
of a portion of Thessaly (Rhianus, Fragm. 18. p. 71, ed, Dantzer). 

Hellanikus had written a work, now lost, entitled Aevxadcoveca: all the 
fragments of it which are cited have reference to places in Thessaly, Lokris 
and Phokis. See Preller, ad Hellanitum, p. 12 (D6rpt. 1840). Probably 
Hellanikus is the main source of the important position occupred by Deuka- 
fién in Grecian legend. Thrasybulus and Akestodérus represented Deu- 
kalién as haying founded the oracle of Déd6na, immediately after the deluge 
(Etm. Mag. v. Awdwvaioc). 

? Apollodérus connects this deluge with the wickedness of the brazen race 
in Hesiod, according to the practice general with the logographers of string- 
ing together a sequence out of legends totally unconnected with each other 
(i..7,.2). 

3 Hesiod, Fragm. 135. ed. Markts. ap. Strabo. vii. p. 322, where the word 
Ada¢, proposed by Heyne as the reading of the unintelligible text, appears to 

VOL. I. 5 Toe. 


98 HISTORY OF GREECK. 


on landing from the ark sacrificed a grateful offering to Zeus 
Phyxios, or the God of escape ; he also erected altars in Thessaly 
to the twelve great gods of Olympus.! 

The reality of this deluge was firmly believed thooaghuie Pre 
historical ages of Greece: the chronologers, reckoning up by gen- 
ealogies, assigned the exact date of it, and placed it at the same 
time as the conflagration of the world by the rashness of Phaé- 
ton, during the reign of Krotépas king of Argus, the seventh 
from Inachus.2. The meteorological work of Aristotle admits and 
reasons upon this deluge as an unquestionable fact, though he 
alters the locality by placing it west of Mount Pindus, near Do 
dona and the river Acheléus.8 He at the same time treats it as 
a physical phenomenon, the result of periodical cycles in the 
atmosphere, thus departing from the religious character of the 
ald legend, which described it as a judgment inflicted. by Zeus 
upon a wicked race. Statements founded upon this event were 
in circulation throughout Greece even toa very late date. The 
Megarians affirmed that Megaros, their hero, son of Zeus by a 
local nymph, had found safety from the waters on the lofty sum- 





me preferable to any of the other suggestions. Pindar, Olymp. ix. 47. 
"Arep 0 Eivde duddayov Krynoaoday Aidivov yévov: Aaol 0 dvopacdev, 
Virgil, Georgic i. 63. “Unde homines nati, darum genus.” Epicharmus ap. 
Schol. Pindar. Olymp. ix. 56. Hygin. f. 153. Philochorus retained the ety- 
mology, though he gave a totally different fable, nowise connected with 
Deukalién, to account for it; a curious proof how pleasing it was to the 
fancy of the Greek (see Schol. ad Pind. 1. c. 68). 

1 Apollod. i. 7,2. Hellanic. Fragm. 15. Didot. Hellanikus affirmed that 
the ark rested on Mount Othrys, not on Mount Parnassus (Fragm. 16. Didot). 
Servius (ad Virgil. Eclog. vi. 41) placed it on Mount Athds— Hyginus (f. 
153) on Mount tna. 

2 Tatian adv. Gree. c. 60, adopted both by Clemens and Eusebius. The 
Parian marble placed this deluge in the reign of Kranaos at Athens, 752 
years before the first recorded Olympiad, and 1528 years before the Christian 
zra; Apollodérus also places it in the reign of Kranaos, and in that of 
Nyctimus in Arcadia (iii. 8, 2; 14, 5). 

The-deluge and the eXpyrosis or conflagration are connected together also 
in Servius ad Virgil. Bucol. vi. 41: he refines both of them into a “muta- 
tionem temporum.” 

3 Aristot. Meteorol. i. 14. Justin rationalizes the fable by telling us that 
Deukalién was king of Thessaly, who provided shelter and protection te 
the fugitives from the deluge (ii. 6, 11) 


HELLEN AND HIS SONS. 99 


mit of their mountain Geraneia, which had not been completely 
submerged. And in the magnificent temple of the Olympian 
Zeus at Athens, a cavity in the earth was shown, through which 
it was affirmed that the waters of the deluge had retired. Even in 
the time of Pausanias, the priests poured into this cavity holy 
offerings of meal and honey.! In this, as in other parts of Greece, 
the idea of the Deukalionian deluge was blended with the reli- 
gious impressions of the people and commemorated by their sa- 
cred ceremonies. 

The offspring of Deukalién and Pyrrha were two sons, Hellén 
and Amphiktyén, and a daughter, Prétogeneia, whose son by 
Zeus was Aéthlius: it was however maintained by many, that 
Hellén was the son of Zeus and not of Deukalién. Hellén had 
by a nymph three sons, Dérus, Xuthus, and AXolus. He gave 
to those who had been before called Greeks,? the name of Hel- 
lénes, and partitioned his terrritory among his three children. 
Z£olus reigned in Thessaly; Xuthus received Peloponnésus, 
and had by Creiisa as his sons, Acheus and I6n; while Dérus 
occupied the country lying opposite to the Peloponnésus, on the 
northern side of the Corinthian Gulf. These three gave to the 
inhabitants of their respective countries the names of .olians, 
Achezaus and Idnians, and Dérians.? 

Such is the genealogy as we find it in Apollodérus. In so far 
as the names and filiation are concerned, many points in. it are 
given differently, or implicitly contradicted, by Euripidés and 
other writers. Though as literal and personal history it deserves 





1 Pausan. i. 18,7; 40,1, According to the Parian marble (s. 5), Deuka- 
lién had come to Athens after the deluge, and had there himself founded the 
temple of the Olympian Zeus. The etymology and allegorization of the 
names of Deukalién and Pyrrha, given by VOlcker in his ingenious Mytho- 
logie des Iapetischen Geschlechts (Giessen, 1824), p. 343, appears to me not 
at all convincing. 

2 Such is the statement of Apollod6rus (i. 7, 3); but I cannot bring my- 
self to believe that the name (Tpaixot) Greeks is at all old in the legend, or 
that the passage of Hesiod, in which Gracus and Latins purport to be 
mentioned, is genuine. 

See Hesiod, Theogon. 1013. and Catalog. Fragm. xxix. ed. Gottling. 
with the note of Géttling; also Wachsmuth, Hellen. Alte-th. i. 1. p. 311, and 
fernhardy, Griech, Literat. vol. i. p. 167. 

3 Apollod. i. 7, 4. 


100 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


no notice, its import is both intelligible and comprehensive. Ti 
expounds and symbolizes the first fraternal aggregation of Hel- 
lénic men, together with their territorial distribution and the in- 
stitutions which they collectively venerated. 

There were two great holding-points in common for every sec- 
tion of Greeks. One was the Amphiktyonic assembly, which 
met half-yearly, alternately at Delphi and at Thermopylz; ori- 
ginally and chiefly for common religious purposes, but indirectly 
and occasionally embracing political and social objects along with 
them. The other was, the public festivals or games, of which 
the Olympic came first in importance; next, the Pythian, Ne- 
mean and Isthmian, — institutions which combined religious so- 
lemnities with recreative effusion and hearty sympathies, in a man- 
ner so imposing and so unparalleled. Amphikty6n represents the 
first of these institutions, and Aéthlius the second. As the Am- 
phiktyonic assembly was always especially connected with Ther- 
mopylz and Thessally, Amphiktyon is made the son of the Thes- . 
salian Deukalién; but as the Olympic festival was nowise locally 
sonnected with Deukalién, Aéthlius is represented as having Zeus 
jor his father, and as touching Deukalidn only through the mater- 
nal line. It will be seen presently, that the only matter predi- 
sated respecting Aéthlius is, that he settled in the territory of 
Elis, and begat Endymién: this brings him into local contact with 
‘he Olympic games, and his function is then ended. 

Having thus got Hellas as an aggregate with its main cement~ 
ing forces, we march on to its subdivision into parts, through 
£olus, Dérus and Xuthus, the three sons of Hellen;! a distribu- 
tion which is far from being exhaustive: nevertheless, the gene- 
alogists whom Apollodérus follows recognize no more than three 
sons. 

The genealogy is essentially post-Homeric ; for Homer knows 
Hellas and the Hellénes only in connection with a portion of 





’ How literally and implicitly even the ablest Grecks believed in epony- 
mous persons, such as Hellén and J6n, as the real progenitors of the races 
called after him, may be seen by this, that Aristotle gives this common de 
scent as the definition of yévo¢ (Metaphysic. iv. p. 118, Brandis) :— 

Tévog Aéyerat, rd piv..... 7d 2, ad’ ob dv Got mpdrov kivhoavrog ely 
rd elvat, Obra yap Aéyovrat of per, “EdAqvec Td yévoc, of d8, "Iwvec TQ, of 
ney dnd"EAAgvoc, of dé dxd “Iwvog, elvar mpotov yervgoavtog, 


ZOLUS, DORUS, AND XUTHUS. 10] 


Achaia Phthidtis. But as it is recognized in the Hesiodic Cata- 

fogue!— composed probably within the first century after tha 
commencement of recorded Olympiads, or before 676 B. c.— the 
peculiarities of it, dating from so early a period, deserve much 
attention. We may remark, first, that it seems to exhibit to us 
Dérus and Z£olus as the only pure and genuine offspring of Hel- 
lén. For their brother Xuthus is not enrolled as an eponymus; he 
neither founds nor names any people; it is only his sons Acheus 
and I6n, after his blood has been mingled with that of the 
Erechtheid Kreiisa, who become eponyms and founders, each of 
his own separate people. Next, as to the territorial distribution, 
Xuthus receives Peloponnésus from his father, and unites him- 
self with Attica (which the author of this genealogy seems to 
haye conceived as originally unconnected with Hellén) by his 
marriage with the daughter of the indigenous hero, Erechtheus. 
The issue of this marriage, Achzus and I6n, present to us the 
population of Peloponnésus and Attica conjointly as related 
among themselves by the tie of brotherhood, but as one degree 
more distant both from Dorians and olians. olus reigns over 
the regions about Thessaly, and called the people in those parts 
Z£olians ; while Dérus occupies “the country over against Pelo- 
ponnésus on the opposite side of the Corinthian Gulf,” and calls 
the inhabitants after himself, Dorians.2 It is at once evident that 





1 Hesiod, Fragm. 8. p. 278, ed. Marktsch.— 

"EAAnvoc 0 éyévovto SepiotéroAot BactAjec 
AGpéc.te, ZovdOc Te, kat Aiodoc lamoxapune 
AloAidar 0” éyévovto GeusotoroAo: Bacidjec 
Kpnted¢ 70 "ASapac kat Liovdoc alorkoujrne 
Larpavets 7 ddikog kat bxépSupoc epihpne. 

* Apollod. i. 7,3. “EAAnvoc 62 kat Nopdne ’Opagidog (4), Adpoc, ZodVor, 
Aiohocg. Abtd¢ piv obv ag’ abrod Todc Kadovpévovg Tpaikode mpoonydpevoer 
"EAAnvac, Toic bd? maicw éuéptoe tiv xopav. Kai ZotSo¢ pév AaBdv ri» 
TleAorévenoov, éx Kpeotone tig "Epexdéiwc ’Axardv éyévynce kat “Iwva, d¢’ 
év ’Ayatol kat “Iavec kadoivra. Adpoc dt, THY Tépav xdpav ILedo- 
mTovv7c ov Aagsoarv,rorve catoikove ad éavtov Auwpteic étxé- 
Aesev. Alodoc 63, BactAebuv tHv wepi OetTariap Térwr, Tod¢ évotkotyTag 
Aiodeic mpoonyépevce. 

Strabo (viii. p. 383) and Conén (Narr. 27), who evidently copy from the 
same source, represent Dorus as going to settle in the territory properly 


known as Doris. 
LIBRARY 


UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
DIVERCINE 


102 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


this designation is in no way applicable to the contined district 
between Parnassus and C&ta, which alone is known by the name 
of Doris, and its inhabitants by that of Dérians, in the historical 
ages. In the view of the author of this genealogy, the Dorians 
are the original occupants of the large range of territory north 
of the Corinthian Gulf, comprising Atélia, Phékis, and the 
territory of the Ozolian Lokrians. And this farther harmonizes 
with the other legend noticed by Apollodérus, when he states 
that ZZtolus, son of Endymién, having been forced to expatriate 
from Peloponnésus, crossed into the Kurétid territory,! and was 
there hospitably received by Dorus, Laodokus and Polypetés, 
sons of Apollo and Phthia. He slew his hosts, acquired the ter- 
ritory, and gave to it the name of AXtélia: his son Pleurén mar- 
ried Xanthippé, daughter of Dérus; while his other son, Kalyd6n, 
marries /Zolia, daughter of Amythaén. Here again we have the 
name of Dérus, or the Dérians, connected with the tract subse- 
quently termed AXtdlia. That Dérus should in one place be 
called the son of Apollo and Phthia, and in another place the son 
of Hellén by a nymph, will surprise no one accustomed to the 
fluctuating personal nomenclature of these old legends: moreover 
the name of Phthia is easy to reconcile with that of Hellén, as 
both are identified with the same portion of Thessaly, even from 
the days of the Iliad. 

This story, that the Dérians were at one time the occupants, or 
the chief occupants, of the range of territory between the river 
Achelous and the northern shore of the Corinthian Gulf, is at 
least more suitable to the facts attested by historical evidence 
than the legends given in Herodotus, who represents the Dérians 
as originally in the Phthidtid; then as passing under Dérus, the 
son of Hellén, into the Histiadtid, under the mountains of Ossa and 
Olympus; next, as driven by the Kadmeians into the regions of 
Pindus; from thence passing into the Dryopid territory, on Mount 
(Eta; lastly, from thence into Peloponnésus.2 The received 





1 Apollod. i. 7,6. AlrwAdg......-.%. gvyav ei¢ tiv Kovpyrida xopav, 
kreivag Tove irodelauévove P¥iac nal ’ArbAZwvo¢ viodc, Adpov Kat Aaddokov 
kat TloAvroirny, ag’ éavrod rhv xopav Aitwdiav éxadece. Again,i. 8, 1. 
TAevpdy (son of Atélus) yjuac Zavdinrny riv Adpov, maida éyévynces 
Aynvopa. 

* Herod. i. 56, 


DORIANS NORTH OF THE CORINTHIAN GULF. 103 


story was, that the great Dorian establishments in Peloponnésus 
were formed by invasion from the north, and that the invaders 
crossed the gulf from Naupaktus,—a statement which, however 
disputable with respect to Argos, seems highly probable in regard 
both to Sparta and Messénia. That the name of Déorians com- 
prehended far more than the inhabitants of the insignificant 
tetrapolis of Déris Proper, must be assumed, if we believe that 
they conquered Sparta and Messénia: both the magnitude of the 
conquest itself, and the passage of a large portion of them from 
Naupaktus, harmonize with the legend as given by Apollodérus, 
in which the Dorians are represented as the principal inhabitants 
of the northern shore of the gulf. The statements which we find 
in Herodotus, respecting the early migrations of the Dorians, 
have been considered as possessing greater historical value than 
those of the fabulist Apollodérus. But both are equally matter 
of legend, while the brief indications of the latter seem to be most 
in harmony with the facts which we afterwards find attested by 
history. 

It has already been mentioned that the genealogy which makes 
/£olus, Xuthus and Dérus sons of Hellén, is as old as the 
Hesiodic Catalogue; probably also that which makes Hellén son 
of Deukalidn. Aéthlius also is an Hesiodic personage: whether 
Amphiktyén be so or not, we have no proof.! They could not 
have been introduced into the legendary genealogy until after the 
Jlympic games and the Amphiktyonic council had acquired an 





* Schol. Apollon. Rhod. iv. 57. Tov 68 ’Evdvyiova ’Hoiodog piv ’AedAiov 
tov Atdc kat Kadoene maida Aéyet......... Ka? Ileicavdpog dé ra abra 
onal, kat "AxovaiAaoc, Kat Pepexidne, kat Nixavdpoc év devrépy AiTwAckov, 
kal Ocdrourog év ’Exoroutate. 

Respecting the parentage of Hellén, the references to Hesiod are very con- 
fused. Compare Schol. Homer. Odyss. x. 2, and Schol. Apollon. Rhod. iii 
1086. See also Hellanic. Frag. 10. Didot. 

Apollodérus, and Pherekydés before him (Frag. 51. Didot), called Proté- 
geneia daughter of Deukalién; Pindar (Olymp. ix. 64) designated her as 
daughter of Opus. One of the stratagems mentioned by the Scholiast to get 
rid of this genealogical discrepancy was, the supposition that Deukalién had 
two names (d:vvyoc) ; that he was also named Opus. (Schol. Pind. Olymp. 
ix. 85). 

That the Deukalide or posterity of Deukalién reigned in Thessaly, was 
mentioned both by Hesiod and Hekateeus, ap. Schol. Apollon. Rh-d. iv. 265 


104 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


established ascendancy and universal reverence ia 
Greece. 

Respecting Dérus the son of Hellén, we find neither ‘iaasie 
nor legendary genealogy; respecting Xuthus, very little beyond — 
the tale of Kreiisa and Ién, which has its place more naturally 
among the Attic fables. _Achzeus however, who is here represent- 
ed as the son of Xuthus, appears in other stories with very 
different parentage and accompaniments. According to the state- 
ment which we find in Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Achzeus, 
Phthius and Pelasgus are sons of Poseidén and Larissa. They 
migrate from Peloponnésus into Thessaly, and distribute the 
Thessalian territory between them, giving their names’ to its 
principal divisions: their descendants in the sixth generation 
were driven out of that country by the invasion of Deukalién at 
the head of the Kurétes and the Leleges.!. This was the story 
of those who wanted to provide an eponymus for the Achzans in 
the southern districts of Thessaly: Pausanias accomplishes - the 
same object by different means, representing Achzeus, the son of 
Xuthus as having gone back to Thessaly and occupied the portion 
of it to which his father was entitled. Then, by way of explain- 
ing how it was that there were Achzans at Sparta and at Argos, 
he tells us that Archander and Architelés, the sons of Archzus, 
came back from Thessaly to Peloponnésus, and married two 
daughters of Danaus: they acquired great influence at Argos and 
Sparta, and gave to the people the name of Acheans after their 
father Achzeus.2 

Euripidés also deviates very materially from the Hesiodia 





! Dionys. H. A. R.i. 17. 

2 Pausan. vii. 1, 1-3. Herodotus also mentions {ii. 97) Archander, son of 
Phthius and grandson of Achzus, who married the daughter of Danaus. 
Larcher (Essai sur la Chronologie d’Herodote, ch. x. p. 321) tells us that 
this cannot be the Danaus who came from Egypt, the father of the fifty 
daughters, who must have lived two centuries earlier, as may be proved by 
chronological arguments: this must be another Danaus, according to him, 

Strabo seems to give a different story respecting the Achwans in Pelepon- 
nésus: he says that they were the original population of the peninsula, that 
they came in from Phthia with Pelops, and inhabited Laconia, which was 
from them called Argos Achaicum, and that on the conquest of the Dérians, 
they moved into Achaia properly so called, expelling the Iénians therefrom 
(Strabo, viii p.365). ‘This narrative is, I presume, borrowed from Ephorus 


THE ZOLIDS, OR SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF ZOLUS. 105 


genealogy in respect to these eponymous persons. In the drama 
called I6n, he describes I6n as son of Kreiisa by Apollo, but 
adopted by Xuthus: according to him, the real sons of Xuthus 
and Kreiisa are Dérus and Achzus,! — eponyms of the Dérians 
and Achzans in the interior of Peloponnésus. And it is a still 
more capital point of difference, that he omits Hellén altogether 
-—making Xuthus an Achzan by race, the son of Aolus, who 
is the son of Zeus.2 This is the more remarkable, as in the 
fragments of two other dramas of Euripidés, the Melanippé and 
the olus, we find Hellén mentioned both as father of AXolus 
and son of Zeus.? To the general public even of the most 
instructed city of Greece, fluctuations and discrepancies in these 
mythical genealogies seem to have been neither surprising nor 
offensive. 


CHAPTER VI. 
THE ZOLIDS, OR SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF ZOLUS. 


Ir two of the sons of Hellén, Dérus and Xuthus, present to us 
families comparatively unnoticed in mythical narrative, the third 
son, AZolus, richly makes up for the deficiency. From him we 
pass to his seven sons and five daughters, amidst a great abun- 
dance of heroic and poetical incident. 

In dealing however with these extensive mythical families, it 
is necessary to observe, that the legendary world of Greece, in 
the manner in which it is presented to us, appears invested with 
a degree of symmetry and coherence which did not originally 
belong to it. For the old ballads and stories which were sung or 





1 Eurip. Ion, 1590. ? Eurip. Ion, 64. 

* See the Fragments of these two plays in Matthiae’s edition; compare 
Welcker, Griechisch. Tragod. v. ii. p. 842. If we may judge from the Frag- 
ments of the Latin Melanippé of Ennius (see Fragm. 2, ed. Bothe), Helléa 
was introduced as one of the characters of the piece. 


5* 


106 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


recounted at the multiplied festivals of Greece, each on its own 
special theme, have been lost: the religious narratives, which the 
Exegétés of every temple had present to his memcry, explana- 
tory of the peculiar religious ceremonies and local customs in his 
own town or Déme, have passed away: all these primitive ele- 
ments, originally distinct and unconnected, are removed out of 
our sight, and we possess only an aggregate result, formed by 
many confluent streams of fable, and connected together by the 
agency of subsequent poets and logographers. Even the earliest 
agents in this work of connecting and systematizing — the Hesio- 
dic poets — have been hardly at all preserved. Our information 
respecting Grecian mythology is derived chiefly from the prose 
logographers who followed them, and in whose works, since a 
continuous narrative was above all things essential to them, the 
fabulous personages are woven into still more comprehensive 
pedigrees, and the original isolation of the legends still better 
disguised. Hekateus, Pherekydés, Hellanikus, and Akusilaus 
lived at a time when the idea of Hellas as one great whole, com- 
posed of fraternal sections, was deeply rooted in the mind of 
every Greek; and when the fancy of one or a few great families, 
branching out widely from one common stem, was more popular 
and acceptable than that of a distinct indigenous origin in each of 
the separate districts. These logographers, indeed, have them- 
selves been lost; but Apollodorus and the various scholiasts, our 
great immediate sources of information respecting Grecian mytho- 
logy, chiefly borrowed from them : so that the legendary world of 
Greece is in fact known to us through them, combined with the 
dramatic and Alexandrine poets, their Latin imitators, and the 
still later class of scholiasts—-except indeed such occasional 
glimpses as we obtain from the Iliad and the Odyssey, and the 
remaining Hesiodic fragments, which exhibit but too frequently a 
hopeless diversity when confronted with the narratives of the 
logographers. 

Though olus (as has been already stated) is himself called 
the son of Hellén along with Dorus and Xuthus, yet the legends 
concerning the olids, far from being dependent upon this 
genealogy, are not all even coherent with it: moreover the name 
of £olus in the legend is older than that of Hellén, inasmuch ag 


ZOLIVS, OR SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF ZOLUS. 107 


it occurs both in the Iliad and Odyssey.! Odysseus sees in the 
under-world the beautiful Tyré, daughter of Salméneus, and wife 
of Krétheus, son of Zolus. 

®olus is represented as having reigned in Thessaly: his seven 
sons were Krétheus, Sisyphus, Athamas, Salméneus, Deidn, 
Magnés and Periérés: his five daughters, Canacé, Alcyoné, 
Peisidiké, Calycé and Perimédé. The fables of this race seem 
to be distinguished by a constant introduction of the god Posei- 
d6n, as well as by an unusual prevalence of haughty and pre- 
sumptuous attributes among the AXolid heroes, leading them te 
affront the gods by pretences of equality, and sometimes even by 
defiance. The worship of Poseidén must probably have been 
diffused and preéminent among a people with whom these legends 


originated. 
SECTION IL—SONS OF ZOLUS. 


Salméneus is not described in the Odyssey as son of JEolus, 
but he is so denominated both in the Hesiodic Catalogue, and by 
the subsequent logographers. His daughter Tyré became ena- 
moured of the river Enipeus, the most beautiful of all streams 
that traverse the earth: she frequented the banks assiduously, 
and there the god Poseidén found means to indulge his passion 
for her, assuming the character of the river god himself. The 
fruit of this alliance were the twin brothers, Pelias and Néleus: 
Tyr6 afterwards was given in marriage to her uncle Krétheus, 
another son of ASolus, by whom she had A®s6n, Pherés and Amy- 
thadn—all names of celebrity in the heroic legends.2 The 
adventures of Tyro formed the subject of an affecting drama ot 
Sophoklés, now lost. Her father had married a second wife, 
named Sidéré, whose cruel counsels induced him to punish and 
torture his daughter on account of her intercourse with Poseidén. 
She was shorn of her magnificent hair, beaten and ill-used in 





1 Jliad, vi. 154. Ziovdor AioAidye, etc. 

Again Odyss. xi. 234.— 
"Ev jot xpoétnv Tupd idov eirarépetar, 
"H $470 Larpwvrijo¢ duipovog Exyovog eivat, 
$7 58 KpySijoc yuvd Eupevar AloAidao. 

* Homer, Odyss. xi. 234-257; xv. 226. 


108 HISTURY OF GREECE. 


various ways, and confined in a loathsome dungecn. Unable te 
take care of her two children, she had been compelled to expose 
them immediately on their birth in a little boat on the river 
Enipeus; they were preserved by the kindness of a herdsman, 
and when grown up to manhood, rescued their mother, and 
revenged her wrongs by putting to death the iron-hearted Sidéré 
This pathetic tale respecting the long imprisonment of Tyré is 
substituted by Sophoklés in place of the Homeric legend, which 
represented her to have become the wife of Krétheus and mother 
of a numerous offspring.? 

Her father, the unjust Salmoneus, exhibited in his conduct the 
most insolent impiety towards the gods. _He assumed the name 
and title even of Zeus, and caused to be offered to himself the 
sacrifices destined for that god: he also imitated the thunder and 
lightning, by driving about with brazen caldrons attached to his 
chariot and casting lighted torches towards heaven. Such wicked 
ness finally drew upon him the wrath of Zeus, who smote him 
with a thunderbolt, and effaced from the earth the city which he 
had founded, with all its inhabitants.3 

Pelias and Néleus, “both stout vassals of the great Zeus,” 
became engaged in dissension respecting the kingdom of Iélkos ia 





1 Diodérus, iv. 68. Sophoklés, Fragm. 1. Tupd. Ladde Sidypo nai gé- 
povea tovvoua. The genius of Sophoklés is occasionally seduced by this 
play upon the etymology of a name, even in the most impressive scenes of 
his tragedies. See Ajax, 425. Compare Hellanik, Fragm. p. 9, ed. Preller 
There was a first and second edition of the Tyré — rig devtépag. Tupode. 
Schol. ad Aristoph. Av. 276. See the few fragments of the lost drama in 
Dindorf’s Collection, p. 53. ‘The plot was in many respects analogous to the 
Antiopé of Euripidés. 

® A third story, different both from Homer and from Sophoklés, respecting 
Tyr6, is found in Hyginus (Fab. Ix.): it is of a tragical cast, and borrowed, 
like so many other tales in that collection, from one of the lost Greek dramas. 

8. Apollod.i 9,7. Zarywveds 1’ Gdixog kat drépFupoc Teprhpyc. Hesiod, 
Fragm. Catal. 8. Marktscheffel. 

Where the city of Salméneus was situated, the ancient investigatcrs were 
not agreed; whether in the Pisatid, or in Elis, or in Thessaly (see Strabo, 
viii. p. 356). Euripidés in his Bolus placed him on the banks of the 
Alpheius (Eurip. Fragm. /ol.1). A village and fountain in the Pisatid 
bore the name of Salméné; but the mention of the river Enipeus seems to 
mark Thessaly as the original seat of the legend. But the natveté of the tale 
preserved by Apollodérus (Virgil in the Aneid, vi. 586, has retouched it) 


NELEUS. —MELAMPUS. 168 


Thessaly. elias got possession of it, and dwelt there in plenty 
and prosperity ; but he had offended the goddess Héré by killing 
Sidéré upon her altar, and the effects of her wrath w-re manifest- 
ed in his relations with his nephew Jason.! 

Néleus quitted Thessaly, went into Peloponnésus, and there 
founded the kingdom of Pylos. He purchased by immense 
marriazx2 presents, the privilege of wedding the beautiful Chloris, 
daughter of Amphién, king of Orchomenos, by whom he had 
twelve sons and but one daughter?—the fair and captivating 
Péré, whom suitors from all the neighborhood courted in mar- 
riage. But Néleus, “the haughtiest of living men,” refused to 
entertain the pretensions of any of them: he would grant his 
daughter only to that man who should bring to hina the oxen of 
Iphiklos, from Phylaké in Thessaly. These piccious animals 
were carefully guarded, as well by herdsmen as by a dog whom 
neither man nor animal could approach. Neveitheless, Bias, the 
son of Amythaon, nephew of Néleus, being desperately enamored 
of Péré, prevailed upon his brother Melampus to undertake for 
his sake the perilous adventure, in spite of the prophetic knowl- 
edge of the latter, which forewarned him that though he would 
ultimately succeed, the prize must be purchased by severe cap- 
tivity and suffering. Melampus, in attempting to steal the oxen, 
was seized and put in prison; from whence nothing but his 
prophetic powers rescued him. Being acquainted with the lan- 
guage of worms, he heard these animals communicating to each 
other, in the roof over his head, that the beams were nearly eaten 
through and about to fall in. He communicated this intelligence 
to his guards, and demanded to be conveyed to another place of 
confinement, announcing that the roof would presently fall in and 
bury them, The prediction was fulfilled, and Phylakos, father of 





marks its ancient date: the final circumstance of that tale was, that the city 
and its inhabitants were annihilated. 

Ephorus makes Salméneus king of the Epeians and of the Pisate (Fragm 
15, ed. Didot). 

The lost drama of Sophoklés, called ZaAuwvedc, was a dpdua catvork iw 
See Dindorf’s Fragm. 483. 

1 Hom. Od. xi. 280. Apollod. i. 9,9. xpatépw Separérte Ards, ete. 

* Diodér. iv. 68. 

# Nadéa re peyadupov, ayavetarov Gwovtwv (Hom. Odyss. xv. 228). 


110 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Iphiklos, full of wonder at this specimen cf prophetic power, 
immediately caused him to be released. He further consulted 
him respecting the condition of his son Iphiklos, who was child- 
less; and pron.ised him the possession of the oxen on condition 
of his suggesting the means whereby offspring might be ensured. 
A vulture having communicated to Melampus the requisite 
information, Podarkés, the son of Iphiklos, was born shortly 
afterwards. In this manner Melampus obtained possession of the 
oxen, and conveyed them to Pylos, obtaining for his brother Bias 
the hand of Péré.1 How this great legendary character, by mi- 
raculously healing the deranged daughters of Proetos, procured 
both for himself and for Bias dominion in Argos, has been re- 
counted in a preceding chapter. 

Of the twelve sons of Néleus, one at least, Periklymenos,—he- 
sides the ever-memorable Nestér,—was distinguished for his ex 
ploits as well as for his miraculous gifts. Poseid6n, the divine father 
of the race, had bestowed upon him the privilege of changing his 
form at pleasure into that of any bird, beast, reptile, or insect.2 He 
had occasion for all these resources, and he employed them for a 
time with success in defending his family against the terrible indig- 
nation of Héraklés, who, provoked by the refusal of Néleus to per- 
form for him the ceremony of purification after his murder of Iphi- 
tus, attacked the Néleids at Pylos. Periklymenos by his extraor- 
dinary powers prolonged the resistance, but the hour of his fate 
was at length brought upon him by the intervention of Athéné, 
who pointed him out to Héraklés while he was perched as a bee 
upon the hero’s chariot. He was killed, and Héraklés became 
completely victorious, overpowering Poseidén, Héré, Arés, and 
Hadés, and even wounding the three latter, who assisted in the. 





* Hom. Od. xi. 278; xv, 234. Apollod. i. 9,12. The basis of this curi- 
ous romance is in the Odyssey, amplified by subsequent poets. There are 
points however in the old Homeric legend, as it is briefly sketched in the 
fifteenth book of the Cdyssey, which seem to have been subsequently left 
out or varied. Néleus seizes the property of Mclampus during his absence ; 
the latter, returning with the oxen from Phylaké, revenges himself upon 
Néleus for the injury. Odyss. xv. 233. 

* Hesiod, Catalog. ap Schol. Apollén. Rhod. i. 156; Ovid, Metam. xii. p. 
556; Eustath. ad Odyss. xi. p. 284. Poscidén carefully protects Antilochus 
son ‘of Nestor, in the Tliad, xiii. 554-563, 


NESTOR AND THE NELEIDS. 111 


defenc2. Eleven of the sons of Néleus perished by his hand, 
while Nestér, then a youth, was preserved only by his accidental 
absence at Geréna, away from his father’s residence.! 

The proud house of the Néleids was now reduced to Nestér; 
but Nestor singly sufficed to sustain its eminence. He appears 
not only as the defender and avenger of Pylos against the inso 
lence and rapacity of his Epeian neighbors in Elis, but also as 
aiding the Lapithe in their terrible combat against the Centaurs, 
and as companion of Théseus, Peirithous, and the other great 
legendary heroes who preceded the Trojan war. In extreme old 
age his once marvellous power of handling his weapons has in- 
deed passed away, but his activity remains unimpaired, and his 
sagacity as well as his influence in counsel is greater than ever. 
He not only assembles the various Grecian chiefs for the arma- 
ment against Troy, perambulating the districts of Hellas along 
with Odysseus, but. takes a vigorous part in the siege itself, and 
is of preéminent service to Agamemnon. And after the conclu- 
sion of the siege, he is one of the few Grecian princes who re- 
turns to his original dominions, and is found, in a strenuous and 
honored old age, in the midst of his children and subjects, — sit- 
ting with the sceptre of authority on the stone bench before his 
house at Pylos,—offering sacrifice to Poseidon, as his father 
Néleus had done before him,— and mourning only over the death 





Hesiod, Catalog. ap. Schol. Ven. ad Iliad. ii. 336; and Steph. Byz. v. 
Tepyvia; Homer, Il. v. 392; xi. 693; Apollod6r. ii.7,3; Hesiod, Scut. Here. 
360; Pindar, Ol. ix. 32. 

According to the Homeric legend, Néleus himself was not killed by Hé- 
raklés: subsequent poets or logographers, whom Apollodérus follows, seem 
to have thought it an injustice, that the offence given by Néleus himself 
should have been avenged upon his sons and not upon himself; they there- 
fore altered the legend upon this point, and rejected the passage in the Iliad 
as spurious (see Schol. Ven. ad Iliad. xi. 682). 

The refusal of purification by Néleus to Héraklés is a genuine legendary 
cause: the commentators, who were disposed to spread a coating of history 
over these transactions, introduced another cause, — Néleus, as king of Pylos, 
had aided the Orchomenians in their war against Héraklés and the Th*bans 
(see Sch. Ven. ad Iliad. xi. 689). 

The neighborhood of Pylos was distinguished for its ancient worship both 
of Poseidén and of Hadés: there were abundant local legends respecting 
them (see Strabo, viii. pp. 344, 345). 


112 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


of his favorite son Antilochus, who had fallen, along with so many. 
brave companions in arms, in the Trojan war.1 

After Nestér the line of the Néleids numbers undistinguished 
names, — Bérus, Penthilus, and Andropompus,— three succes- 
sive generations down to Melanthus, who on the invasion of Pelo- 
ponnésus by the Herakleids, quitted Pylos and retired to Athens, 
where he became king, in a manner which I shall hereafter re- 
count. His son Kodrus was the last Athénian king; and Néleus, 
one of the sons of Kodrus, is mentioned as the principal conduc- 
tor of what is called the Ionic emigration from Athens to Asia 
Minor. It is certain that during the historical age, not merely - 
the princely family of the Kodrids in Milétus, Ephesus, and other 
Tonic cities, but some of the greatest families even in Athens 
itself, traced their heroic lineage through the Néleids up to Po- 
seidon: and the legends respecting Nestoér and Periklymenos 
would find especial favor amidst Greeks with such feelings and 
belief. The Kodrids at Ephesus, and probably some other Ionic 
towns, long retained the title and honorary precedence of kings, 
even after they had lost the substantial power belonging to the 
office. They stood in the same relation, embodying both religious 
worship and supposed ancestry, to the Néleids and Poseidén, as 
the chiefs of the ®olic colonies to Agamemnén and Orestés. 
The Athenian despot Peisistratus was named after the son of 
Nestér in the Odyssey; and we may safely presume that the 
heroic worship of the Néleids was as carefully cherished at the 
Tonic Milétus as at the Italian Metapontum.3 

Having pursued the line of Salmoneus and Néleus to the end 
of its lengendary career, we may now turn back to that of another 
son of Aolus, Krétheus,— a line hardly less celebrated in respect 
of the heroic names which it presents. Alkéstis, the most beau- 
tiful of the daughters of Pelias,4 was promised by her father in 





1 About Nestdr, Iliad, i. 260-275 ; ii. 370; xi.670-770; Odyss. iii. 5, 110, 
409. 

® Hellanik. Fragm. 10, ed. Didot; Pausan. vii. 2, 3; Herodot. y. 65; 
Strabo, xiv. p. 633. Hellanikus, in giving the genealogy from Néleus t 
Melanthus, traces it through Periklymenos and not through Nestor: the 
words of Herodotus imply that he must have included Nestor. 

* Herodot. v. 67; Strabo, vi. p. 264; Mimnermus, Fragm. 9, Schneidewin, 

“ Tliad, ii. 715. 


2 ALKESTIS AND ADMETUS. 115 


marriage to the man that could bring him a lion and a boar tamed 
to the yoke and drawing together. Admétus, son of Pherés, the 
cponymus of Phere in Thessaly, and thus grandson of Krétheus, 
was enabled by the aid of Apollo to fulfil this condition, and te 
win her;! for Apollo happened at that time to be in his service 
as a slave (condemned to this penalty by Zeus for having put to 
death the Cyclopes), in which capacity he tended the herds and 
horses with such success, as to equip Eumélus (the son of Admé- 
tus) to the Trojan war with the finest horses in the Grecian 
army. ‘Though menial duties were imposed upon him, even to 
the drudgery of grinding in the mill,? he yet carried away with 
him a grateful and friendly sentiment towards his mortal master, 
whom he interfered to rescue from the wrath of the goddess Ar- 
temis, when she was indignant at the omission of her name in his 
wedding sacrifices. Admétus was about to perish by a premature 
death, when Apollo, by earnest solicitation to the Fates, obtained 
for him the privilege that his life should be prolonged, if he could 
find any person to die a voluntary death in his place. His father 
and his mother both refused to make this sacrifice for him, but 
the devoted attachment of his wife Alkéstis disposed her to em- 
brace with cheerfulness the condition of dying to preserve her 





1 Apollodér. i. 9, 15; Eustath. ad Iliad. ii. 711. 

2 Euripid. Alkést. init. Welcker; Griechisch. Tragced. (p. 344) on the 
lost play of Sophoklés called Admétus or Alkéstis; Hom. Iliad. ii. 766 ; 
Hygin. Fab. 50-51 (Sophoklés, Fr. Inc. 730; Dind. ap. Plutarch. Defect. 
Orac. p. 417). This tale of the temporary servitude of particular gods, by 
order of Zeus as a punishment for misbehavior, recurs not unfrequently 
among the incidents of the mythical world. The poet Panyasis (ap. Clem. 
Alexand. Adm. ad Gent. p. 23) — 

TAR piv Anuarnp, TAH 8% KAvrd¢ ’Apuoryvgete, 

TAq 68 Mocedawr, TAH 0 dpyupdrofog *AroAAY 

*Avdpi rapa SvnTd Iytevocuer eic éviavtov* 

TAH 0 Kat SBpiyn6Svp0¢ "Apne bxd Tarpd¢ dvayKns. 
The old legend followed out the fundamental idea with remarkable consis- 
tency : Laédmedén, as the temporary master of Poseidén and Apollo, threat- 
ens to bind them hand and foot, to sell them in the distant islands, and to 
cut off the ears of both, when they come to ask for their stipulated wages 
(Iliad, xxi. 455). It was a new turn given to the story by the Alexandrine 
poets, when they introduced the motive of love, and made the servitude vol- 
untary on the part of Apallo (Kallimachus, Hymn. Apoll. 49; Tibullus, Eleg 
ii. 3, 11-30). 

VOL. I, 8oc. 


114 HISTORY OF GREECE. = 


husband. She had already perished, when Héraklés, the ancient 
guest ani friend of Admétus, arrived during the first hour of 
lamentation; his strength and daring enabled him to rescue the 
deceased Alkéstis even from the grasp of Thanatos (Death), and 
to restore her alive to her disconsolate husband.! 

The son of Pelias, Akastus, had received and sheltered Péleus 
when obliged to fly his country in consequence of the involuntary 
murder of Eurytién. Kréthéis, the wife of Akastus, becoming 
enamored of Péleus, made to him advances. which he -repu- 
diated. Exasperated at his refusal, and determined to procure his 
destruction, she persuaded her husband that Péleus had attempt- 
ed her chastity : upon which Akastus conducted Péleus out upon 
a hunting excursion among the woody regions of Mount Pélion, 
contrived to steal from him the sword fabricated and given by 
Héphestos, and then left him, alone and unarmed, to perish 
by the hands of the Centaurs or by the wild beasts. By the 
friendly aid of the Centaur Cheirén, however, Péleus was pre- 
served, and his sword restored to him: returning to the city, he 
avenged himself by putting to death both Akastus and his perfid- 
ious wife.2 

But amongst all the legends with which the name of Pelias 
is connected, by far the most memorable is that of Jasén and the 
Argonautic expedition. Jasén was son of Aéson, grandson of 
Krétheus, and thus great-grandson of Zolus. Pelias, having 
consulted the oracle respecting the security of his dominion at 
Idlkos, had received in answer a warning to beware of the man 
who should appear before him with only one sandal. He was 
celebrating a festival in honor of Poseidén, when it so happened 
that Jasén appeared before him with one of his feet unsandaled : 
he had lost one sandal in wading through the swollen current of 
the river Anauros. Pelias immediately understood that this was 





! Enrip. Alkéstis, Arg.; Apollod. i. 9,15. To bring this beautiful legend 
more into the color of history, a new version of it was subsequently framed: 
Héraklés was eminently skilled in medicine, and saved the life of Alkéstis 
when she was about to perish from a desperate malady (Plutarch. Amator 
. 17. vol. iv. p. 53, Wytt.). 

* The legend of Akastus and Péleus was given in great detail in the Cata- 
logue of Hesiod (Catalog. Fragm. 20-21, Marktscheff.); Schol. Pindar 
Nem.iv. 95. Scho! Apoll. Rhod. i. 224; Apollod. iii. 13, 2. 


MEDIA AND THE DAUGHTERS OF PELIAS. 115 


the enemy against whom the oracle had forewarned him, Asa 
means of averting the danger, he imposed upon Jasén the des- 
perate task of bringing back to Idlkos the Golden Fleece, — the 
fleece of that ram which had carried Phryxos from Achaia to 
Kolchis, and which Phryxos had dedicated in the latter country 
as an offering to the god Arés. The result of this injunction was 
the memorable expedition — of the ship Argo and her crew call- 
ed the Argonauts, composed of the bravest and noblest youths 
of Greece —which cannot be conveniéntly included among the 
legends of the A®olids, and is reserved for a separate chapter. 
The voyage of the Argo was long protracted, and Pelias, per- 
suaded that neither the ship nor her crew would ever return, put 
to death both the father and mother of Jasén, together with their 
infant son. /£s6n, the father, being permitted to choose the manner 
of his own death, drank bull’s blood while performing a sacrifice 
to the gods. At length, however, Jas6n did return, bringing with 
him not only. the golden fleece, but also Médea, daughter of 
Jiétés, king of Kolchis, as his wife, — a woman distinguished for 
magical skill and cunning, by whose assistance alone the Argo- 
nauts had succeeded in their project. Though determined to 
avenge himself upon Pelias, Jas6n knew he could only succeed 
by stratagem: he remained with his companions at a short dis- 
tance from Iolkos, while Médea, feigning herself a fugitive from 
his ill-usage, entered the town alone, and procured access to the 
daughters of Pelias. By exhibitions of her magical powers she 
soon obtained unqualified ascendency over their minds. For ex- 
ample, she selected from the flocks of Pelias a ram in the extrem- 
ity of old age, cut him up and boiled him in a caldron with herbs, 
and brought him out in the shape of a young and vigorous lamb:! 
the daughters of Pelias were made to believe that their old father 
could in like manner be restored to youth. In this persuasion 
they cut him up with their own hands and cast his linsbs into the 





1 This incident was contained in one of the earliest dramas of Euripidés, 
the Il.eAzadec, now lost. Moses of Choréné (Progymnasm. ap. Maii ad Euseb, 
p. 43), who gives an extract from the argument, says that the poet“ extremos 
mentiendi fines attingit.” 

The ‘Plérouor of Sophoklés seems also to have turned upon the same 
catastrophe (see Fragm. 479, Dindorf.). 


116 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


caldron, trusting that Médea would produce upon him the same 
magical effect. Médea pretended that an invocation to the moon 
was a necessary part of the ceremony: she went up to the top 
of the house as if to pronounce it, and there lighting the fire- 
signal concerted with the Argonauts, Jasén and his companions 
burst in and possessed themselves of the town. Satisfied with 
having thus revenged himself, Jason yielded the principality 
of Idlkos to Akastus, son of Pelias, and retired with Médea to 
Corinth. Thus did the goddess Héré gratify her ancient wrath 
against Pelias: she had constantly watched over Jason, and had 
carried the “all-notorious” Argo through its innumerable perils, 
in order that Jasoén might bring home Médea to accomplish the 
ruin of his uncle.! The misguided daughters of Pelias departed 





1The kindness of Héré towards Jasén seems to be older in the legend 
than her displeasure against Pelias; at least it is specially noticed in the 
Odyssey, as the great cause of the escape of the ship Argé: ’AAA’ “Hon ma- 
pérepwper, tre? didoc jev "Ijowy (xii.70). In the Hesiodic Theogony Pelias 
stands to Jasén in the same relation as Eurystheus to Héraklés, —a severe 
taskmaster as well as a wicked and insolent man,— ifpiorj¢ Teding wat 
araodaroc, 63pipéepyoc (Theog. 995). Apollonius Rhodius keeps the wrath 
of Héré against Pelias in the foreground, i. 14; iii. 1134; iv. 242; see also 
Hygin, f. 13. 

There is great diversity in the stories given of the proximate circum- 
stances connected with the death of Pelias: Eurip. Méd. 491; Apollodor. i. 
9, 27; Diodér. iv, 50-52; Ovid, Metam. vii. 162, 203, 297, 347 ; Pausan. viii 
11, 2; Schol. ad Lycoph. 175. 

In the legend of Akastus and Pélcus as recounted above, Akastus was 
made to perish by the hand of Péleus. I do not take upon me to reconcile 
these contradictions. 

Pausanias mentions that he could not find in any of the poets, so far as 
he had read, the names of the daughters of Pelias, and that the painter Mikén 
had given to them names (évéuara 0’ abtaig month piv EdeTo obdeic, boa 
y’ éxcretaueda jpeic, etc., Pausan. viii. 11,1). Yet their names are given in 
the authors whom Diodérus copied; and Alkéstis, at any rate, was most 
memorable. Mik6n gave the names Asteropeia and Antinoé, altogether dif- 
ferent from those in Diodérus. Both Diodérus and Hyginus exonerate Al 
késtis from all share in the death of her father (Hygin. f. 24). 

The old poem called the Néoroz (see Argum. ad Eurip. Méd., and Schol. 
Aristophan. Equit. 1321) recounted, that Médea had boiled in a caldron the 
old As6n, father of Jasén, with herbs and incantations, and that she had 
brought him ont young and strong. Ovid copies this (Metam. vii. 162-203), 
It is singular that Pher¢kydés and Simonidés said that she had performed 


MEDEA AT CORINTH. 117 


as voluntary exiles ty Arcadia: Akastus his son celebrated splen- 
did funeral games in honor of his deceased father.! 

Jason and Médea retired from I6lkos to Corinth, where they 
resided ten years: their children were — Medeius, whom the 
Centaur Cheirén educated in the regions of Mount Pélion,2— 
and Mermerus and Pherés, born at Corinth. After they had 
resided there ten years in prosperity, Jasén set his affections on 
Glauké, daughter of Kre6n3 king of Corinth; and as her father - 
was willing to give her to him in marriage, he determined to 
repudiate Médea, who received orders forthwith to leave Corinth. 
Stung with this insult and bent upon revenge, Médea prepared a 
poisoned robe, and sent it as a marriage present to Glauké: it 
was unthinkingly accepted and put on, and the body of the un- 
fortunate bride was burnt up and consumed. Kreén, her father, 
who tried to tear from her the burning garment, shared her fate 
and perished. The exulting Médea escaped by means of a 
chariot with winged serpents furnished to her by her grandfather 
Hélios: she placed herself under the protection of Aigéus at 
Athens, by whom she had a son named Médus. She left her 
young children in the sacred enclosure of the Arkrean Héré, 
relying on the protection of the altar to ensure their safety ; but 
the Corinthians were so exasperated against her for the murder 





this process upon Jas6n himself (Schol. Aristoph, /. c.). Diogenes (ap. Stobe. 
Florileg. t. xxix. 92) rationalizes the story, and converts Médea from an 
enchantress into an improving and regenerating preceptress. The death of 
ison, as described in the text, is given from Diodérus and Apollodérus. 
‘Médea seems to have been worshipped as a goddess in other places besides 
Corinth (see Athenagor. Legat. pro Christ. 12; Macrobius, i. 12, p. 247, 
Gronoyv. ). 

' These funeral games in honor of Pelias were among the most renowned 
of the mythical incidents: they were celebrated in a special poem by Stesicho- 
rus, and represented on the chest of Kypselus at Olympia. Kastér, Meleager, 
Amphiaraos, Jasén, Péleus, Mopsos, etc. contended in them (Pausan. v. 17. 
4; Stesichori Fragm. 1. p. 54, ed. Klewe; Athén. iv. 172). How familiar 
the details of them were to the mind of « literary Greek is indirectly attested 
by Plutarch, Sympos. v. 2, vol. iii. p. 762, Wytt. 

2 Hesiod, Theogon. 998. : 

3 According to the Schol. ad Eurip. Méd. 20, Jason marries the daughter 
of Hippotés the son of Kreén, who is the son of Lykxthos. Lykzethos, after 
the departure of Bellerophon from Corinth, reigned twenty-seven years; then 
Kreon reigned thirty-five years ; then came Hippotés. 


118 HISTURY OF GREECE. 


of Kreén and Glauké, that they dragged the children away from 
the altar and put them to death. The miserable Jason perished 
by a fragment of his own ship Argé, which fell upon him while 
he was asleep under it,! being hauled on shore, according to the 
habitual practice of the ancients. 

The first establishment at Ephyré, or Corinth, had been found- 
ed by Sisyphus, another of the sons of AZolus, brother of Salmé- 


? Apollodér. i. 9, 27; Dioddér. iv. 54. The Médea of Eurypidés, which has 
fortunately been preserved to us, is too well known to need express reference. 
He makes Médea the destroyer of her own children, and borrows from this 
circumstance the most pathetic touches of his exquisite drama. Parmenis- 
kés accused him of having been bribed by the Corinthians to give this turn to 
the legend ; and we may regard the accusation as a proof that the older and 
more current tale imputed the murder of the children to the Corinthians 
(Schol. Eurip. Med. 275, where Didymos gives the story out of the old poem 
of Kreophylos). See also Alian, V. H. v. 21; Pausan. ii. 3, 6. 

The most significant fact in respect to the fable is, that the Corinthians 
celebrated periodically a propitiatory sacrifice to Héré Akrea and to Merme- 
rus and Pherés, as an atonement for the sin of having violated the sanctuary 
of the altar. The legend grew out of this religious ceremony, and was so 
arranged as to explain and account for it (see Eurip. Méd. 1376, with the 
Schol. Diodor. iv. 55). 

Mermerus and Pherés were the names given to the children of Médea and 
Jason in the old Naupaktian Verses; in which, however, the legend must 
haye been recounted quite differently, since they said that Jason and Médea 
had gone from Iélkos, not to Corinth, but to Corcyra; and that Mermerus 
had perished in hunting on the opposite continent of Epirus. Kingthén 
again, another ancient genealogical poet, called the children of Médea and 
Jason Eriépis and Médos (Pausan. ii. 3,7). Diodérus gives them different 
names (iv. 34). Hesiod, in the Theogony, speaks only of-Medeius as the son 
of Jasén. 

Médea does not appear either in the Iliad or Odyssey: in the former, we 
find Agamédé, daughter of Augeas, “ who knows all the poisons (or medi- 
cines) which the earth nourishes” (Iliad, xi. 740); in the latter, we have 
Circé, sister of Aétés, father of Médea, and living in the ean island (Odyss. 
x. 70). Circé is daughter of the god Hélios, as Médea is his granddaughter, 
~—~she is herself a goddess. She is in many points the parallel of Médea; 
she forewarns and preserves Odysseus throughout his dangers, as Médea aids 
Jasén: according to the Hesiodic story, she has two children by Odysseus, 
Agrius and Latinus (Theogon. 1001). 

Odysseus goes to Ephyré to Ilos the son of Mermerus, to procure poison 
for his arrows: Eustathius treats this Mermerus as the son of Médea (see 
Odyss. i. 270, and Eust.). As Ephyré is the legendary name of Corinth, we 
may presume this to be a thread of the same mythical tissue. 





SISYPHUS THE ZOLID. 119 


neus and Krétheus.! The /olid Sisyphus was d.stinguished as 
an unexampled master of cunning and deceit. He blocked up 
the road along the isthmus, and killed the strangers who came 
aiong it by rolling down upon them great stones from the moun- 
tains above. He was more than a match even for the arch thief 
Autolycus, the son of Hermés, who derived from his father the 
gift of changing the color and shape of stolen goods, so that they 
could no longer be recognized: Sisyphus, by marking his sheep 
under the foot, detected Autolycus when he stole them, and 
obliged him to restore the plunder. His penetration discovered 
the amour of Zeus with the nymph ‘gina, daughter of the river- 
god Asépus. Zeus had carried her off to the island of GEnéné 
(which subsequently bore the name of gina); upon which 
Asépus, eager to recover her, inquired of Sisyphus whither she 
was gone: the latter told him what had happened, on condition 
that he should provide a spring of water on the summit of the 
Acro-Corinthus. Zeus, indignant with Sisyphus for this revela- 
tion, inflicted upon him in Hadés the punishment of perpetually 
heaving up a hill a great and heavy stone, which, so soon as it 
attained the summit, rolled back again in spite of all his efforts, 
with irresistible force into the plain.? 

In the application of the AZolid genealogy to Corinth, Sisyphus, 
the son of olus, appears as the first name: but the old Corin- 





! See Euripid. ol. — Fragm. 1, Dindorf; Dikzarch. Vit. Gree. p. 22. 

Respecting Sisyphus, see Apollodér.i. 9, 3; iii. 12,6. Pausan. ii.5,1. Schol 
ad Iliad. i. 180. Another legend about the amour of Sisyphus with Tyrd, is 
in Hygin. fab. 60, and about the manner in which he overreached even Hadés 
(Pherekydés ap. Schol. Iliad. vi. 153). The stone rolled by Sisyphus in the 
under-world appears in Odyss. xi. 592. The name of Sisyphus was given 
during the historical age to men of craft and stratagem, such as Derkyllidés 
(Xenoph. Hellenic. iii. 1, 8). He passed for the real father of Odysseus, 
though Heyne (ad Apollod6r. i. 9, 3) treats this as another Sisyphus, where- 
by he destroys the suitableness of the predicate as regards Odysseus. The 
duplication. and triplication of synonymous personages is an ordinary 
resource for the purpose of reducing the legends into a seeming chronological 
sequence. 

Even in the days of Eumélus a religious mystery was observed respecting 
the tombs of Sisyphus and Néleus, — the latter had also died at Corinth, — 
no one could say where they were buried (Pausan. ii. 2, 2). 

Sisyphus even oyverreached Persephoné, and made his escape from the 
znder-world (‘Theognis, 702). 


a 


120 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


thian poet Eumélus either found or framed an heroic genealogy 
for his native city independent both of Xolus and Sisyphus. 
According to this genealogy, Ephyré, daughter of Oceanus and 
Téthys, was the primitive tenant of the Corinthian territory, 
Asdépus of the Sikyénian: both were assigned to the god Helios, 
in adjusting a dispute between him and Poseid6én, by Briareus. 
Hélios divided the territory between his two sons Alétés and 
Aléeus: to the former he assigned Corinth, to the latter Sikydén. 
Kétés, obeying the admonition of an oracle, emigrated to Kolchis, 
leaving his territory under the rule of Bunos, the son of Hermés, 
with the stipulation that it should be restored whenever either he 
or any of his descendants returned. After the death of Bunos, 
both Corinth and Sikydén were possessed by Epépeus, son of 
Aléeus, a wicked man. His son Marathén left him in disgust 
and retired into Attica, but returned after his death and succeeded 
to his territory, which he in turn divided between his two sons 
Corinthos and Sikyén, from whom the names of the two districts 
were first derived. Corinthos died without issue, and the Corin- 
thians then invited Médea from Iélkos as the representative of 
/Eétés: she with her husband Jasén thus obtained the sovereignty 
of Corinth.1 This legend of Eumélus, one of the earliest of the 
genealogical poets, so different from the story adopted by Neo- 
phrén or Euripidés, was followed certainly by Simonidés and 
seemingly by Theopompus.2 The incidents in it are imagined 
and arranged with a view to the supremacy of Médea; the 
emigration of A%étés and the conditions under which he transfer- 
red his sceptre, being so laid out as to confer upon Médea an 
hereditary title to the throne. The Corinthians paid to Médea 
and to her children solemn worship, either divine or heroic, in 
conjunction with Héré Akraa,3 and this was sufficient to give to 





? Pausan. ii. 1, 1; 3, 10. Schol. ad Pindar. Olymp. xiii. 74. Schol. 
Lycoph. 174-1024. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 1212. 

* Simonid. ap. Schol. ad Eurip. Méd. 10-20; Theopompus, Fragm. 340, 
Didot; though Welcker (Der Episch. Cycl. p. 29) thinks that this does not 
belong to the historian Theopompus. Epimenidés also followed the story of 
Eamélus in making Aétés a Corinthian (Schol. ad Apoll. Rhod. iii. 242). 

* epi d2 tij¢ eic Kopivdov petoixhoews, “Inmve éxriSerat Kat ‘“EAAGviKog* 
ti Kt BeBacidevne rig KopivSov  Mfdeva, Eipndoc ioropet nat Zywvidyc: 
"Or: 62 Kal ddavaroc hv  Midera, Movoatog év tH rept loSuiwv loropei, due 
eal'mepl tov rig? Axpaiag “Hpac éoprav éxteSeic. (Schol. Eurip. Méd, 10) 


BELLEROPHON. 121 


Médea a prominent place in the genealogy composed by a Corin- 
thian poet, accustomed to blend together gods, heroes and men in 
the antiquities of his native city. According to the legend of 
Eumélus, Jasén became (through Médea) king of Corinth; but 
she concealed the children of their marriage in the temple of 
Héré, trusting that the goddess would render them immortal. 
Jason, discovering her proceedings, left her and retired in disgust 
to Idlkos; Médea also, being disappointed in her scheme, quitted 
the place, leaving the throne in the hands of Sisyphus, to whom, 
according to the story of Theopompus, she had become attached.! 
Other legends recounted, that Zeus had contracted a passion for 
Médea, but that she had rejected his suit from fear of the displea- 
sure of Héré; who, as a recompense for such fidelity, rendered 
her children immortal :? moreover Médea had erected, by special 
command of Héré, the celebrated temple of Aphrodité at Corinth. 
The tenor of these fables manifests their connection with the 
temple of Héré: and we may consider the legend of Médea as 
having been originally quite independent of that of Sisyphus, but 
fitted on to it, in seeming chronological sequence, so as to satisfy 
the feelings of those olids of Corinth who passed for his 
descendants. 

Sisyphus had for his sons Glaukos and Ornytién. From 
Glaukos sprang Bellerophén, whose romantic adventures com- 
mence with the Iliad, and are further expanded by subsequent 
poets: according to some accounts he was really the son of 
Poseidén, the prominent deity of the AXolid family. The youth 





Compare also v. 1376 of the play itself, with the Scholia and Pausan. ii. 3, 
6. Both Alkman and Hesiod represented Médea as a goddess (Athenogoras, 
Legatia pro Christianis, p. 54, ed. Oxon.). 

1 Pausan. ii. 3, 10; Schol. Pindar. Olymp. xiii. 74. 

? Scho]. Pindar. Olymp. xiii. 32-74 ; Plutarch. De Herodot. Malign: p. 871. 

* Pindar. Olymp. xiii. 98. and Schol. ad 1; Schol. ad Iliad. vi. 155; this 
seems to be the sense of Iliad, vi. 191. 

The lost drama called Jobatés of Sophoklés, and the two by Euripidés 
ealled Sthenebea and Bellerophdn, handled the adventures of this hero. See 
the collection of the few fragments remaining in Dindorf, Fragm. Sophok, 
280; Fragm. Eurip. p. 87-108; and Hygin. fab. 67. 

Welcker (Griechische Trag6d. ii. p. 777-800) has ingeniously put together 
all that can be divined respecting the two plays of Euripidés. 

Volcker seeks to make out that Bellerophon is identical with Poseidén 

VOL. I. 6 


122 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


and beauty of Bellerophén rendered him the object of a strong 
passion on the part of the Anteia, wife of Proetos king of Argos. 
Finding her advances rejected, she contracted a violent hatred 
towards him, and endeavored by false accusations to prevail upon 
her husband to kill him. Preetos refused to commit the deed 
under his own roof, but despatched him to his son-in-law the king 
of Lykia in Asia Minor, putting into his hands a folded tablet full 
of destructive symbols. Conformably to these suggestions, the 
most perilous undertakings were imposed upon Bellerophén. He 
was directed to attack the monster Chimera and to conquer the 
warlike Solymi as well as the Amazons: as he returned victorious 
from these enterprises, an ambuscade was laid for him by the 
bravest Lykian warriors, all of whom he slew. At length the 
Lykian king recognized him “as the genuine son of a god,” and 
gave him his daughter in marriage together with half of his 
kingdom. The grand-children of Bellerophon, Glaukos and Sar- 
pédon, — the latter a son of his daughter Laodameia by Zeus, — 
combat as allies of Troy against the host of Agamemnon! 
Respecting the winged Pegasus, Homer says nothing; but later 
poets assigned to Bellerophén this miraculous steed, whose 
parentage is given in the Hesiodic Theogony, as the instrument 
both of his voyage and of his success.2. Heroic worship was paid 
at Corinth to Bellerophén, and he seems to have been a favorite 
theme of recollection not only among the Corinthians themselves, 
but also among the numerous colonists whom they sent out to 
other regions.3 

From Ornytién, the son of Sisyphus, we are conducted through 
a series of three undistinguished family names, — Thoas, Damo- 
phon, and the brothers Propodas and Hyanthidas, — to the time 





Hippios, — a separate personification of one of the attributes of the god Posei- 
dén. For this conjecture he gives some plausible grounds (Mythologie des 
Japetisch. Geschlechts, p- 129 eee ys 

? Tliad. vi. 155-210. * Hesiod, Theogon. 283. 

3 Pausan. ii. 2,4. See Pindar, Olymp. xiii. 90, addressed to Xenophén 
ihe Corinthian, and the Adoniazusz of the Syracusan Theocritus, a poem iq 
which common Syracusan life and feeling are so graphically depicted, Idyll 
kv. 91.— 

Lvpakosiace éxitrdccecc ; 
'Q¢ & eidne kai rodro, Kopivdiar eivec dvadev 
‘Qc kai 6 BeAAgpodwv: Uedorovvacioti Aadetpeg. 


ATHAMAS AND PHRYXUS. 198 


of the Dérian occupation of Corinth!, which will be hereafter 
recounted. 

“We now pass from Sisyphus and the Corinthian fables to 
another son of /Zolus, Athames, whose family history is not 
less replete with mournful and tragical incidents, abundantly 
diversified by the poets. Athamas, we are told, was king of 
Orchomenos ; his wife Nephelé was a goddess, and he had by 
her two children, Phryxus and Hellé. After a certain time he 
neglected Nephelé, and took to himself as a new wife Ind, the 
daughter of Kadmus, by whom he had two sons, Learchus and 
Melikertés. Iné, looking upon Phryxus with the hatred of a 
step-mother, laid a snare for his life. She persuaded the women 
to roast the seed-wheat, which, when sown in this condition, yielded 
no crop, so that famine overspread the land. Athamas sent tu 
Delphi to implore counsel and a remedy: he received for answer, 
through the machinations of Ino with the oracle, that the barren- 
ness of the fields could not be alleviated except by offering 
Phryxus as a sacrifice to Zeus. The distress of the people com- 
pelled him to execute this injunction, and Phryxus was led as a 
victim to the altar. But the power of his mother Nephelé 
snatched him from destruction, and procured for him from Hermés 
a ram with a fleece of gold, upon which he and his sister Hellé 
mounted and were carried across the sea. The ram took the 
direction of the Euxine sea and Kolchis: when they were cross- 
ing the Hellespont, Hellé fell off into the narrow strait, which 
took its name from that incident. Upon this, the ram, who was 
endued with speech, consoled the terrified Phryxus, and ultimately 
carried him safe to Kolchis: Aiétés, king of Kolchis son of the 
god Hélios and brother of Circé, received Phryxus kindly, and 
gave him his daughter Chalciopé in marriage. Phryxus sacri- 
ficed the ram to Zeus Phyxios, and suspended the golden fleece 
in the sacred grove of Arés. 

Athamas — according to some both Athamas and Iné — were 
afterwards driven mad by the anger of the goddess Héré; inso- 
much that the father shot his own son Learchus, and would alse 
have put to death his other son Melikertés, if Ind had not 
snatched him away. She fled with the boy, across the Megarian 





? Pausan. ii. 4, 3, 


124 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


territory and Mount Geraneia, to the rock Moluris, overhanging 
the Sarénic Gulf: Athamas pursued her, and in order to escape 
him she leaped into the sea. She became a sea-goddess undér 
the title of Leukothea; while the body of Melikertés was cast 
ashore on the neighboring territory of Schcenus, and buried by 
his uncle Sisyphus, who was directed by the Nereids to pay to 
him heroic honors under the name of Palemén. The Isthmian 
games, one of the great, periodical festivals of Greece, were cele- 
brated in honor of the god Poseidén, in conjunction with Palz- 
mon asa hero. Athamas abandoned his territory, and became 
the first settler of a neighboring region called from him Athman- 
tia, or the Athamantian plain.! | 





1 Eurip. Méd. 1250, with the Scholia, according to which story Ind killea 
both her children: — tig 


"Ive paveioav ék Seav, 6¥ 7 Atd¢ 
Aduap viv tféreupe ddpatwv Gy. 


Compare Valckenaer, Diatribe in Eurip.; Apollodér. i. 9, 1-2; Schol. ad 
Pindar. Argum..ad Isthm. p. 180. The many varieties of the fable of Atha- 
mas and his family may be seen in Hygin. fab. 1-5; Philostephanus ap. 
Schol. Iliad. vii. 86: it was a favorite subject with the tragedians, and was 
handled by 2éschylus, Sophoklés and Euripidés in more than one drama 
(see Welcker, Griechische Tragéd. vol. i. p. 312-332; vol. ii. p.612). Heyne 
says that the proper reading of the name is Phrixus, not Phryxus,—incor- 
rectly, I think: épifo¢ connects the name both with the story of roasting the 
wheat (¢péyerv), and also with the country pvyia, of which it was pretended 
that Phryxus was the Eponymus. Ind, or Leukothea, was worshipped as a 
heroine at Megara as well as at Corinth (Pausan. i. 42, 3): the celebrity of 
the Isthmian games carried her worship, as well as that of Palemén, 
throughout most parts of Greece (Cicero, De Nat. Deor. iii. 16). She is the 
only personage of this family noticed either in the Iliad or Odyssey: in the 
latter poem she is a sea-goddess, who has once been a mortal, daughter of 
Kadmus ; she saves Odysseus from imminent danger at sea by presenting 
to him her xp#deuvov (Odyss. v. 433; see the refinements of Aristidés, Orat. 
iii. p. 27). The voyage of Phryxus and Hellé to Kolchis was related in the 
Hesiodic Eoiai: we find the names of the children of Phryxus by the 
daughter of Aétés quoted from that poem (Schol. ad Apollon, Rhod. ii, 
1123;: both Hesiod and Pherekydés mentioned the golden fleece of the ram 
(Eratosthen. Catasterism. 19; Pherekyd. Fragm. 53, Didot). 

Hekateeus preserved the romance of the speaking ram (Schol. Apoll. Rhod 
\. 256) but Hellanikus dropped the story of Hellé having fallen into che 


LEGENDS AND RITES OF THE ATHAMANTIDS. 125 


The legend of Athamas connects itself with some sanguinary 
religious rites and very peculiar family customs, which prevailed 
at Alos, in Achaia Phthidtis, down to a time! later than the his- 
torian Herodotus, and of which some remnant existed at Orcho- 
menos even in the days of Plutarch. Athamas was worshipped 
at Alos as a hero, having both a chapel and a consecrated grove, 
attached to the temple of Zeus Laphystios. On the family of 
which he was the heroic progenitor, a special curse and disability 
stood affixed. The eldest of the race was forbidden to enter the 
prytaneion or government-house; and if he was found within the 
doors of the building, the other citizens laid hold of him on his 
going out, surrounded him with garlands, and led him in solemn 
procession to be sacrificed as a victim at the altar of Zeus 
Laphystios. The prohibition carried with it an exclusion from 
all the public meetings and ceremonies, political as well as 
religious, and from the sacred fire of the state: many of the 
individuals marked out had therefore been bold enough to trans- 
gress it. Some had been seized on quitting the building and 
actually sacrificed ; others had fled the country for a long time to 
avoid a similar fate. 

The guides who conducted Xerxés and his army through 
southern Thessaly detailed to him this existing practice, coupled 
with the local legend, that Athamas, together with Ind, had 
sought to compass the death of Phryxus, who however had 
escaped to Kolchis; that the Achzans had been enjoined by an 
oracle to oifer up Athamas himself as an expiatory sacrifice to 
release the country from the anger of the gods; but that Kytis- 
soros, son of Phryxus, coming back from Kolchis, had intercepted 
the sacrifice of Athamas,? whereby the anger of the gods re- 





pea: according to him she died at Pactyé in the Chersonesus (Schol. Apoll. 
Bhod. ii. 1144). 

The poet Asius seems to have given the genealogy of Athamas by The 
mist6 much in the same manner as we find it in Apollodérus (Pausan. ix. 
23, 3). 

According to the ingenious refinements of Dionysius and Palephatus 
{Sehol. ad Apo!l. Rhod. ii. 1144; Palsphat. de Incred. c. 31) the ram of 
Phryxus was after all a man named Krios, a faithful attendant who aided in 
his escape; others imagined a ship with a ram’s head at the bow. 

lutarch, Quest. Greece. c. 38. p. 299. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. ii. 655. 
* Of the Athamas of Sophoklés, turning upon this intended, but nox con 


126 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


mained still unappeased, and an undying curse rested upon the 
family.1 

That such human sacrifices continued to a greater or less 
extent, even down to a period later than Herodotus, among the 
family who worshipped Athamas as their heroic ancestor, appears 
certain: mention is also made of similar customs in parts of 
Arcadia, and of Thessaly, in honor of Péleus and Cheirén.2 
But we may reasonably presume, that in the period of greater 
humanity which Herodotus witnessed, actual sacrifice had become 
very rare. The curse and the legend still remained, but were 





summated sacrifice, little is known, except from a passage of Aristophanés 
and the Scholia upon it (Nubes, 258).— 


éni ti aTépavov ; oiuot, LOxparec, 
Oorep pe Tov Adanavl’ brug pH Sicere. 


Athamas was introduced in this drama with a garland on his head, on the 
point of being sacrificed as an expiation for the death of his son Phryxus, 
when Héraklés interposes and rescues him. 

 Herodot. vii. 197. Plato, Minds, p. 315. 

? Plato, Minds, c.5. Kaz of rod ’ASauavtoc Exyovor, otag Suciag Piover, 
"E2Anveg ovte¢. As a testimony to the fact still existing or believed to exist, 
this dialogue is quite sufficient, though not the work of Plato. 

Moéviyog 0° loropei, év tH Tév Savpaciov ovvaywys, év TléAAg tag Oerra- 
diag’ Aya:sy avdpwrov Inet kat Xeipwrvt xatadieoSat. (Clemens Alexand. 
Admon. ad Gent. p. 27, Sylb.) Respecting the sacrifices at the temple of 
Zeus Lykzus in Arcadia, see Plato, Republ. viii. p. 565. Pausanias (viii. p. 
38, 5) seems to have shrunk, when he was upon the spot, even from inquir- 
ing what they were —a striking proof of the fearful idea which he had con- 
ceived of them. Plutarch (De Defectu Oracul.¢. 14) speaks of raé¢ xaGAac 
rotovuévac dvdpwrodvaiac. The Schol. ad Lycophron. 229, gives a story 
of children being sacrificed to Melikertés at Tenedos; and Apollodérus 
(ad Porphyr. de Abstinentia, ii. 55, see Apollod. Fragm. 20, ed. Didot) said 
that the Lacedemonians had sacrificed a man to Arés — ka? Aaxedaipovioug 
gnotv 6 AroAAddupog TH "Apert Gbery GvOpwrov. About Salamis in Cyprus, 
see Lactantius, De Falsd Religione, i. c. 21. “Apud Cypri Salaminem, 
humanam hostiam Jovi Teucrus immolavit, idque sacrificium posteris tradi- 
dit: quod est nuper Hadriano imperante sublatum.” 

Respecting human sacrifices in historical Greece, consult a good section in 
K. F. Hermann’s Gottesdienstliche Alterthtmer der Griechen (sect. 27). 
Such sacrifices had been a portion of primitive Grecian religion; but had 
gradually become obsolete everywhere — except in one or two solitary cases, 
which were spoken of with horror. Even in these cases, too, the reality of 
the fact, in later times, is not beyond suspicion. 


ATHAMANTIDS AT ALOS. 127 


not called into practical working, except during periods of intense 
national suffering or apprehension, during which the religious 
sensibilities were always greatly aggravated. We cannot at all 
doubt, that during the alarm created by the presence of the Per- 
sian king with his immense and ill-disciplined host, the minds of 
the Thessalians must have been keenly alive to all that was ter- 
rific in their national stories, and all that was expiatory in their 
religious solemnities. Moreover, the mind of Xerxés himself 
was so awe-struck by the tale, that he reverenced the dwelling-place 
consecrated to Athamas. The guides who recounted to him the 
romantic legend, gave it as the historical and generating cause 
of the existing rule and practice: a critical inquirer is forced 
(as has been remarked before) to reverse the order of precedence, 
and to treat the practice as having been the suggesting cause of 
its own explanatory legend. — 

The family history of Athamas, and the worship of Zeus 
Laphystios, are expressly connected by Herodotus with Alos in 
Achza Phthiotis— one of the towns enumerated in the Iliad as 
under the command of Achilles. But there was also a mountain 
called Laphystion, and a temple and worship of Zeus Laphystios 
between Orchomenos and Koréneia, in the northern portion of 
the territory known in the historical ages as Beotia. Here alsc 
the family story of Athamas is localized, and Athamas is pre- 
sented to us as king of the districts of Koréneia, Haliartus and 
Mount Laphystion: he is thus interwoven with the Orchomenian 
genealogy.!. Andreas (we are told), son of the river Péneios, 
was the first person who settled in the region: from him it 
received the name Andréis. Athamas, coming subsequently to 
Andreus, received from him the territory of Koréneia and Haliar 
tus with Mount Laphystion: he gave in marriage to Andreus, 
Euippé, daughter of his son Leucén, and the issue of this mar- 
riage was Eteoklés, said to be the son of the river Képhisos. 
Korénos and Haliartus, grandsons of the Corinthian Sisyphus, 
were adopted by Athamas, as he had lost all his children: but 
when his grandson Presbén, son of Phryxus, returned to him 
from Kolchis, he divided his territory in such manner that 
Korénos and Haliartus became the founders of the towns which 





1 Pausan, ix. 34, 4. 


128 HISTORY OF GREECF. 


bore their names. Almdn, the son of Sisyphus, alse received 
from Eteoklés a portion of territory, where he established the 
village Alménes.! 

With Eteoklés began, according to a statement in one of the 
Hesiodic poems, the worship of the Charites or Graces, so long 
and so solemnly continued at Orchomenos in the periodical festival 
of the Charitésia, to which many neighboring towns and districts 
seem to have contributed.2 He also distributed the inhabitants 
into two tribes— Eteokleia and Képhisias. He died childless, 
and was succeeded by Almos, who had only two daughters, 
Chrysé and Chrysogeneia. The son of Chrysé by the god Arés 
was Phlegyas, the father and founder of the warlike and preda- 
tory Phlegyz, who despoiled every one within their reach, and 
assaulted not only the pilgrims on their road to Delphi, but even 
the treasures of the temple itself. The offended god punished 
them by continued thunder, by earthquakes, and by pestilence, 
which extinguished all this impious race, except a scanty rem- 
nant who fled into Phokis. 

Chrysogeneia, the other daughter of Almos, had for issue, by 
the god Poseidon, Minyas: the son of Minyas was Orchomenos. 
From these two was derived the name both of Minyz for the 
people, and of Orchomenos for the town. During the reign of 
Orchomenos, Hyéttus came to him from Argos, having become 
an exile in consequence of the death of Molyros: Orchomenos 
assigned to him a portion of land, where he founded the village 
called Hyéttus.4 Orchomenos, having no issue, was succeeded 
by Klymenos, son of Presbon, of the house of Athamas: Kly- 
menos was slain by some Thébans during the festival of Poseid6én 
at Onchéstos ; and his eldest son, Erginus, to avenge his death, 
attacked the Thébans with his utmost foree ;—an attack, in 
which he was so successful, that the latter were forced to subzit, 
and to pay him an annual tribute. 





1 Pausan. ix. 34, 5. 2 Ephorus, Fragm. 68, Marx. 

3 Pausan. ix. 36, 1-3. See also a legend, about the three daughters of 
Minyas, which was treated by the Tanagrsean poetess Korinna, the contempo 
rary of Pindar (Antonin. Liberalis, Narr. x.). 

* This exile of Hyéttus was recounted in the Eoiai. Hesiod, Fragm. 148 
Markt. 


= 





—e er ee 


TROPHONIUS AND AGAMEDES. 129 


The Orchomenian power was now at its height: both Minyas 
and Orchomenos had been princes of surpassing wealth, and the 
former had built a spacious and durable edifice which he had 
filled with gold and silver. But the success of Erginus against 
Thébes was soon terminated and reversed by the hand of the 
irresistible Héraklés, who rejected with disdain the claim of 
tribute, and even mutilated the envoys sent to demand it: he 
not only emancipated Thébes, but broke down and impoverished 
Orchomenos.!_ Erginus in his old age married a young wife, 
from which match sprang the illustrious heroes, or gods, Tro- 
phénius and Agamédés; though many (amongst whom is Pausa- 
nius himself) believed Trophénius to be the son of Apollo? 
Trophénius, one of the most memorable persons in Grecian 
mythology, was worshipped as a god in various places, but with 
especial sanctity as Zeus Trophénius at Lebadeia: in his temple 
at this town, the prophetic manifestations outlasted those of Del- 
phi itself? Trophénius and Agamédés, enjoying matchless 
renown as architects, builtt the temple of Delphi, the thalamus 
of Amphitryén at Thébes, as well as the inaccessible vault of 
Hyrieus at Hyria, in which they are said to have left one stone 
removable at pleasure, so as to reserve for themselves a secret 
entrance. They entered so frequently, and stole so much gold 
and silver, that Hyrieus, astonished at his losses, at length spread 
2 fine net, in which Agamédés was inextricably caught :-Tropho- 
nius cut off his brother’s head and carried it away, so that the 





1 Pausan. ix. 37,2. Apollod. ii. 4,11. Dioddr. iv. 10. The two latter 
tell us that Erginus was slain. Klymené is among the wives and daughters 
of the heroes seen by Odysseus in Hadés: she is termed by the Schol. 
daughter of Minyas (Odyss. xi. 325). 

* Pausan. ix. 37,1-3. <Aéyeras 0? 6 Tpogddvio¢ ’ArdAAwvog eivat, Kal obK 
"Epyivov: Kai tyd te reiSouat, nal botic rapa Tpogdaviov HAVE b7 wavrTevod- 
pevog. 

3 Plutarch, De Defeciu Oracul. c. 5, p. 411. Strabo, ix. p. 414. The 
mention of the honeyed cakes, both in Aristophanés (Nub. 508) and Pausa- 
nias (ix. 39, 5), indicates that the curious preliminary ceremonies, for those 
who consulted the oracle of Trophénius, remained the same after a lapse of 
550 years. Pausanias consulted it himself. There had been at one time an 
oracle of Teiresias at Orchomenos: but it had become silent at an early 
period (Plutarch. Defect. Oracul. c. 44, p. 454). 

“Homer. Hymn, Apoll. 296. Pausan. ix. 11, 1. 

VOL. I. 6* Soc. 


130 HISTORY OF GREKCE 


body, which alone remained, was insufficient to identify the thief. 
Like Amphiaraos, whom he resembles in more than one respect, 
Trophénius was swallowed up by the earth near Lebadeia.! 

From Trophénius and Agamédés the Orchomenian genealogy 
passes to Ascalaphos and Ialmenos, the sons of Arés by Astyo- 
ché, who are named in the Catalogue of the Iliad as leaders of 
the thirty ships from Orchomenos against Troy. Azeus, the 
grandfather of Astyoché in the Iliad, is introduced as the brother 
of Erginus? by Pausanias, who does not carry the pedigree 
lower. 

The genealogy here given out of Pausanias is deserving of the 
more attention, because it seems to have been copied from the 
special history of Orchomenos by the Corinthian Kallippus, who 
again borrowed from the native Orchomenian poet, Chersias: the 
works of the latter had never come into the hands of Pausanias. 
It illustrates forcibly the principle upon which these mythical 
genealogies were framed, for almost every personage in the series 
is an Eponymus. -Andreus gave his name to the country, Atha- 
mas to the Athamantian plain; Minyas, Orchomenos, Korénus, 
Haliartus, Almos and Hyéttos, are each in like manner connected 
with some name of people, tribe, town or village; while Chrysé 
and Chrysogeneia have their origin in the reputed ancient wealth 
of Orchomenos. . Abundant discrepancies are found, however, in 
respect to this old genealogy, if we look to other accounts. Ac- 
cording to one statement, Orchomenos was the son of Zeus by 
Isioné, daughter of Danaus; Minyas was the son of Orchome- 
nos (or rather of Poseidén) by Hermippé, daughter of Boedtos ; 
the sons of Minyas were Presbon, Orchomenos, Athamas and 
Diochthondas.? Others represented Minyas as son of Poseidon 





’ Pausan. ix. 37, 3. A similar story, but far more romantic and amplified, 
is told by Herodotus (ii. 121), respecting the treasury vault of Rhampsini- 
tus, king of Egypt. Charax (ap. Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 508) gives the same 
tale, but places the scene in the treasury-vault of Augeas, king of Elis, 
which he says was built by Trophonius, to whom he assigns ‘a totally 
different genealogy. The romantic adventures of the tale rendered it emi- 
nently fit to be interwoven at some point or another of legendary history, in 
any country. 

? Pausan. ix. 38, 6; 29, 1. 

* Schol. Apollon. Rhod. i. 230. Compare Schol. ad Lycophron. 873. 


ORCAOMENIAN GENEALOGY. 131 


by Kallirrhoé, an Oceanic nymph,! while Dionysius called him 
son of Arés, and Aristodémus, son of Aleas: lastly, there were 
not wanting authors who termed both Minyas and Orchomenos 
sons of Eteoklés.2 Nor do we find in any one of these gen- 
ealogies the name of Amphién, the son of Iasus, who figures 
so prominently in the Odyssey as king of Orchomenos, and whose 
beautiful daughter Chloris is married to Néleus. © Pausanias 
mentions him, but not as king, which is the denomination given 
to him in Homer.3 

The discrepancies here cited are hardly necessary in order to 
prove that these Orchomenian genealogies possess no historical 
value. Yet some probable inferences appear deducible from the 
general tenor of the legends, whether the facts and persons of 
which they are composed be real or fictitious. 

Throughout all the historical age, Orchomenos is a member of 
the Boedtian confederation. But the Bcedtians are said to have 
been immigrants into the territory which bore their name from 
Thessaly ; and prior to the time of their immigration, Orchome- 
nos and the surrounding territory appear as possessed by the 
Minyz, who are recognized in that locality both in the Iliad and 
in the Odyssey,‘ and from whom the constantly recurring Epon- 
ymus, King Minyas, is borrowed by the genealogists. Poetical 
legend connects the Orchomenian Minyz on the one side, with 
Pylos and Tryphylia in Peloponnésus ; on the other side, with 
Phthidtis and the town of Idlkos in Thessaly ; also with Corinth,5 





' Schol. Pindar, Olymp. xiv. 5. 

® Schol. Pindar, Isthm. i. 79. Other discrepancies in Schol. Vett.ad Tliad. 
ii. Catalog. 18. 

® Odyss. xi. 283. Pausan. ix. 36, 3. 

. 4 Tliad, ii. 5, 11. Odyss. xi. 283. Hesiod, Fragm. Eoiai, 27, Diintz. "Igev 
® ’Opxéuevov Mivvjiov. Pindar, Olymp. xiv. 4. Tlatatyévwv Mivvdv ério- 
xorot.  Herodot. i. 146. Pausanias calls them Minyz even in their 
dealings with Sylla (ix. 30,1). Buttmann, in his Dissertation (iiber die 
Minyse der Altesten Zeit, in the Mythologus, Diss. xxi. p. 218), doubts 
whether the name Minyz was ever a real name; but all the passages make 
against his opinion. 

5 Schol. Apoll. Rhod. ii. 1186. i. 230. Zxipiog 5? AnuArpiog dyno trode 
scept THY "lwAKdv olkodvtac Miviag KaAgiodat; andi. 763. Thv yap ’loAkdy 
vl Mivvat Gxovy, Ge dnot Siuwvidye év Svupxtoic: also Eustath. ad Iliad. ii. 
512. Steph. Byz. v. Mcvia. Orchomenos and Pylos run together in the 
mind of the poet of the Odyssey, xi. 458. 


132 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


through Sisyphus and his sons. Pherekydés represented Néleus, 
king of Pylos, as having also been king of Orchomenos.! In the 
region of Triphylia, near to or coincident with Pylos, a Minyeian 
river is mentioned by Homer; and we find traces of residents 
called Minyz even in the historical times, though the account 
given by Herodotus of the way-in which they came thither is 
strange and unsatisfactory.? 

Before the great changes which took place in the inhabitants 
of Greece from the immigration of the Thesprétians into Thessaly, 
of the Beeétians into Beétia, and of the Dérians and A®télians 
into Peloponnésus, at a date which we have no means of deter 
mining, the Minye and tribes fraternally connected with them 
seem to have occupied a large portion of the surface of Greece, 
from Iélkos in Thessaly to Pylos in the Peloponnésus. The 
wealth of Orchomenos is renowned even in the Iliad ;3 and when 
we study its topography in detail, we are furnished with a proba- 
ble explanation both of its prosperity and its decay. Orchome- 
nos was situated on the northern bank of the lake K6pais, which 
receives not only the river Képhisos from the valleys of Phdkis, 
but also other rivers from Parnassus and Helicén. The waters 
of the lake find more than one subterranean egress — partly 
through natural rifts and cavities in the limestone mountains, 
partly through a tunnel pierced artificially more than a mile in 
length —into the plain on the north-eastern side, from whence 
they flow into the Eubcean sea near Larymna: and it appears 





1 Pherekyd. Fragm. 56, Didot. We see by the 55th Fragment of the 
same author, that he extended the genealogy of Phryxos to Phere in 
Thessaly. 

? Herodot. iv. 145. Strabo, viii. 337-347. Hom. Iliad, xi. 721. Pausan. 
vi 1, 7. morapzdv Muvvgiov, near Elis. 

3 Tliad, ix. 881. 

4 See the description of these channels or Katabothra in Colonel Leake’s 
Travels in Northern Greece, vol. ii. c. 15, p. 281-293, and still more elabo- 
rately in Fiedler, Reise durch alle Theile des Kénigreichs Griechenlands, 
Leipzig, 1840. He traced fifteen perpendicular shafts sunk for the purpose 
of admitting air intc the tunnel, the first separated from the last by about 
5900 feet: they are now of course overgrown and stopped up (vol. i. p 
115). 

Forchhammer states the length of this tunnel as considerably greater than 
what is here stated. He also gives a plan of the Lake Kopats with the sur 


AMPHIKTYONY AT KALAURIA. 183 


that, so long as these channels were diligently watched and kept 
clear, a large portion of the lake was in the condition of alluvial 
land, preéminently rich and fertile. But when the channels came 
to be either neglected, or designedly choked up by an enemy, the 
water accumulated to such a degree, as to occupy the soil of more 
than one ancient town, to endanger the position of Képz, and to 
occasion the change of the site of Orchomenos itself from the 
plain to the declivity of Mount Hyphanteion. An engineer, 
Kratés, began the clearance of the obstructed water-courses in 
the reign of Alexander the Great, and by his commission — the 
destroyer of Thébes being anxious to reéstablish the extinct 
prosperity of Orchomenos. He succeeded so far as partially to 
drain and diminish the lake, whereby the site of more than one 
ancient city was rendered visible: but the revival of Thébes by 
Kassander, after the decease of Alexander, arrested the progress 
of the undertaking, and the lake soon regained its former dimen- 
sions, to contract which no farther attempt was made.! 
According to the Théban legend,? Héraklés, after his defeat of 
Erginus had blocked up the exit of the waters, and converted 
the Orchomenian plain into a lake. The spreading of these 
waters is thus connected with the humiliation of the Minyz; and 
there can be little hesitation in ascribing to these ancient tenants 
of Orchomenos, before it became beeotized, the enlargement and 
preservation of these protective channels. Nor could ‘such an 
object have been accomplished, without combined action and ae- 
knowledged ascendency on the part of that city over its neigh- 
bors, extending even to the sea at Larymna, where the river K6- 


_ phisos discharges itself. Of its extended influence, as well as 


of its maritime activity, we find a remarkable evidence in the 
ancient and venerated Amphiktyony at Kalauria. ‘The little is- 





sounding region, which I have placed at the end of the second volume of 
this History. See also infra, vol. ii. ch. iii. p. 391. 

1 We owe this interesting fact to Strabo, who is however both concise 
and unsatisfactory, viii. p. 406-407. It was affirmed that there had been 
two ancient towns, named Eleusis and Athéne, originally founded by Ce 
eréps, situated on the lake, and thus overflowed (Steph. Byz. v. ’Adjvac 
Diogen. Laért. iv. 23. Pausan. ix. 24, 2). For the plain or marsh near Or 
chomenos, see Plutarch, Sylla, c. 20-22. 

*Diodér. iv.18. Pausan. ix. 38, 5 


134 HISTORY UF GREECE. 


land so named, near the harbor of Troezén, in Peloponnésus, was 
sacred to Poseid6n, and an asylum of inviolable sanctity. At the 
temple of Poseidén, in Kalauria, there had existed, from unknown 
date, a periodical sacrifice, celebrated by seven cities in common 
— Hermioné, Epidaurus, A®gina, Athens, Prasiz, Nauplia, and 
the Minyeian Orchomenos. This ancient religious combination 
dates from the time when Nauplia was independent of Argos, 
and Prasie of Sparta: Argos and Sparta, according to the usual 
practice in Greece, continued to fulfil the obligation each on the 
part of its respective dependent.! Six out of the seven states are 
at onée sea-towns, and near enough to Kalauria to account for 
their participation in this Amphiktyony. But the junction of 
Orchomenos, from: its comparative remoteness, becomes inexpli- 
eable, except on the supposition that its territory reached the sea, 
and that it enjoyed a considerable maritime traffic — a fact which 
helps to elucidate both its legendary connection with Iélkos, and 
its partnership in what is called the Iénic emigration.2 The my- 
thical genealogy, whereby Pt6os, Schceneus and Erythrios are 
enumerated among the sons of Athamas, goes farther to confirm 
the idea that the towns and localities on the south-east of the 
lake recognized a fraternal origin with the Orchomenian Minyz, 
not less than Koréneia and Haliartus on the south-west.3 

The great power of Orchomenos was broken down, and the 
city reduced to a secondary and half-dependent position by the 
Beedtians of Thébes; at what time, and under what circumstances, 
history has not preserved. The story, that the Théban hero, 
Héraklés, rescued his native city from servitude and tribute to 
Orchomenos, since it comes from a Kadmeian and not from an 
Orchomenian legend, and since the details of it were favorite 
subjects of commemoration in the Thébian temples,‘ affords a 
presumption that Thébes was really once dependent on Orcho- 





1 Strabo, viii. p. 374. "Hv d2 kal "Augixrvovia tig wepl Td iepdy tobTO, Extra 
méAgwv al pereiyov THe Ovaiag: Hoar dé ‘Epurdv, ‘Exidavpoc, Alyiva, "ADivat, 
IIpacteic, NavAceic¢, Opyouevoc 6 Mivieoc. ‘Yrép pév obv trav NavaAcéwr 
*Apyeiot, irép Tpactéwy 68 Aakedaiporvio, Svverédovy. 

* Pausan. ix. 17,1; 26, 1. 

3 See Muller, Orchomenos und die Minyer, p. 214. Pausan. ix. 23, 8 
24,3. The genealogy is as old as the poet Asios, 

* Herod. i. 146. Pausan. vii. 2, 2. 


THEBES AND ORCHOMENUS. 135 


menos. Moreover tbe savage mutilations inflicted by the hero 
on the tribute-seeking envoys, so faithfully portrayed in his sur- 
name Rhinokoloustés, infuse into the mythe a portion of that 
bitter feeling which so long prevailed between Thébes and Or- 
chomenos, and which led the Thébans, as soon as the battle of 
Leuctra had placed supremacy in their hands, to destroy and de- 
populate their rival.!. The ensuing generation saw the same fate 
retorted upon Thébes, combined with the restoration of Orcho- 
menos. ‘The legendary grandeur of this city continued, long 
after it had ceased to be distinguished for wealth and power, im- 
perishably recorded both in the minds of the nobler citizens and 
in the compositions of the poets ; the emphatic language of Pau- 
sanias shows how much he found concerning it in the old epic.2 


SECTION I.—DAUGHTERS OF HOLUS. 


With several of the daughters of Zolus memorable mythical 
pedigrees and narratives are connected. Alcyéne married Kéyx, 
the son of Edésphoros, but both she and her husband displayed 
in a high degree the overweening insolence common in the /olic 
race. The wife called her husband Zeus, while he addressed her 
as Héré, for which presumptuous act Zeus punished them by 
changing both into birds.3 

Canacé had by the god Poseidén several children, amongst 





1 Theocrit. xvi. 104.— 

"Q "EredxAevor Siyarpec Seal, al Miviecov 
*Opxopevor diréoroat, drexySouevov roKa O7nacc. 

The scholiast gives a sense to these words much narrower than they really 
bear. See Dioddr. xv. 79; Pausan. ix. 15. In the oration which Isokratés 
places in the mouth of a Platawan, complaining of the oppressions of Thébes, 
the ancient servitude and tribute to Orchomenos is cast in the teeth of the 
Thébans (Isokrat. Orat. Plataic. vol. iii. p. 32, Auger). 

* Pausan. ix. 34,5. See also the fourteenth Olympie Ode of Pindar, ad- 
dressed to the Orchomenian Asopikus. The learned and instructive work 
of K. QO. Miiller, Orchomenos und die Minyer, embodies everything which 
can be known respecting this once-memorable city; indeed the contents of 
the work extends much farther than its title promises. 

® Apollodér. i.7, 4. A. Kéyx,—king of Trachin, — the friend of Héraklés 
and protector of the Hérakleids to the extent of his power (Hesiod. Seut 
Hercul. 355-473 ; Apollod6r. ii. 7,5; Hekate. Fragm. 353, Didot.). 


136 HISTO tY OF GREECE. 


whom were Epépeus and Aldeus.! Aléeus married Imphimédea, 
who became enamored of the god Poseidén, and boasted of her 
intimacy with him. She had by him two sons, Otos and Ephi- 
altés, the huge and formidable Aldids, — Titanic beings, nine 
fathoms in height and nine cubits in breadth, even in their boy- 
hood, before they had attained their full strength. These Aldids 
defied and insulted the gods in Olympus ; they paid their court 
to Héré and Artemis, and they even seized and bound Arés, 
confining him in a brazen chamber for thirteen months. No one 
knew where he was, and the intolerable chain would have worn 
him to death, had not Eriboea, the jealous stepmother of the 
Aldids, revealed the place of his detention to Hermés, who carried 
him surreptitiously away when at the last extremity ; nor could 
Arés obtain any atonement for such an indignity. Otus and 
Ephialtés even prepared to assault the gods in heaven, piling up 
Ossa on Olympus and Pelion on Ossa, in order to reach them. 
And this they would have accomplished had they been allowed 
to grow to their full maturity; but the arrows of Apollo put a 
timely end to their short-lived career.? 





1 Canacé, danghter of Aolus, is a subject of deep tragical interest both in 
Enripidés and Ovid. Theeleventh Heroic Epistle of the latter, founded 
mainly on the lost tragedy of the former called Zolus, purports to be from 
Canacé to Macareus, and contains a pathetic description of the ill-fated pas- 
sion between a brother and sister: see the fragments of the AXolus in Din- 
dorf’s collection. In the tale of Kaunos and Byblis, both children of Milétos, 
the results of an incestuous passion are different but hardly less melancholy 
(Parthenios, Narr. xi.). 

Makar, the son of /Eolus, is the primitive settler of the island of Lesbos 
(Hom, Hymn. Apoll. 37): moreover in the Odyssey, olus son of Hippotés, 
the dispenser of the winds, has: six sons and six daughters, and marries 
the former to the latter (Odyss. x. 7). The two persons called X®olus are 
brought into connection genealogically (see Schol. ad Odyss. 1. c., and Dio- 
dor. iv. 67), but it seems probable that Euripidés was the first to place the 
names of Macareus and Canacé in that relation which confers upon them 
their poetical celebrity. Sostratus (ap. Stobzeum, t. 614, p. 404) can hardly 
be considered to have borrowed from any older source than Earipidés 
Welcker (Griech. Tragéd. vol. ii. p. 860) puts together all that cat be known 
respecting the structure of the lost drama of Euripidés. . 

? Tliad, v. 386; Odyss. xi. 306; Apoliodér. i. 7.4. So Typhéens, in the 
Hesiodic Theogony, the last enemy of the gods, is killed before he comes 
to maturity (Theog. 837). For the different turns given to this ancient Ho 


THE GIGANTIC ALOIDS. 187 


The genealogy assigned to Calycé, another daughter of Zolus, 
conducts us from Thessaly to Elis and &tdlia. She married 
Aéthlius (the son of Zeus by Prétogeneia, daughter of Deukalién 
and sister of Hellén), who conducted a colony out of Thessaly 
and settled in the territory of Elis. He had for his son Endy- 
midn, respecting whom the Hesiodic Catalogue and the Eoiai 
related several wonderful things. Zeus granted him the privilege 
of determining the hour of his own death, and even translated 
him into heaven, which he forfeited by daring to pay court to 
Héré: his vision in this criminal attempt was cheated by a cloud, 
and he was cast out into the under-world.!. According to other 





meric legend, see Heyne, ad Apollodér. 1. c.,and Hyginus, f. 28. The Aldids 
were noticed in the Hesiodic poems (ap. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 482). Odys 

seus does not see them in Hadés, as Heyne by mistake says; he sees their 
mother Iphimédea. Virgil (En. vi. 582) assigns to them a place among the 
sufferers of punishment in Tartarus. 

Eumélus, the Corinthian poet, designated Aldeus as son of the god Hélios 
and brother of Atétés, the father of Médea (Eumél. Fragm. 2, Marktscheffel). 
The scene of their death was subsequently laid in Naxos (Pindar, Pyth. iv. 
88): their tombs were seen at Anthéd6n in Beedtia (Pausan. ix. 22,4). The 
very curious legend alluded to by Pausanias from Hegesinoos, the author of 
an Atthis, — to the effect that Otos and Ephialtés were the first to establish 
the worship of the Muses in Helicén, and that they founded Ascra along with 
Coklos, the son of Poseidén, —is one which we have no means of tracing 
farther (Pausan. ix. 29, 1). 

The story of the Aldids, as Diodérus gives it (v. 51, 52), diverges on 
almost every point: it is evidently borrowed from some Naxian archeologist, 
and the only information which we collect from it is, that Otos and Ephialtés 
received heroic honors at Naxos, The views of O. Maller (Orchomenos, p. 
387) appear to me unusually vague and fanciful. 

Ephialtés takes part in the combat of the giants against the gods (Apollo- 
dor. t. 6, 2), where Heyne remarks, as in so many other cases, “ Ephialtés hic 
non confundendus cum altero Aléci filio;” an observation just indeed, if we 
are supposed to be dealing with personages and adventures historically real, 
but altogether misleading in regard to these legendary characters; for here 
the general conception of Ephialtés and his attributes is in both cases the 
same; but the particular adventures ascribed to him cannot be made to con: 
sist, as facts, one with the other. 

? Hesiod, Akusilaus and Pherekydés, ap. Schol. Apollén. Rhod. iv, 57, 
"Ty & ai7O Savarov tapuinc. The Scholium is very full of matter, and ex. 
hibits many of the diversities in the tale of Endymi6n: see also Apollodéx 
i. 7,5; Pausan. v. 1, 2; Conén. Narr. 14. 


138 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


stories, his great beauty caused the goddess Séléne to become ena» 
mored of him, and to visit him by night during his sleep: — the 
sleep of Endymién became a proverbial expression for enviable, 
undisturbed, and deathless repose.! Endymién had for issue 
(Pausanias gives us three different accounts, and Apollodérus a 
fourth, of the name of his wife) Epeios, /£tdlus, Pxén, and a 
daughter Eurykydé. He caused his three sons to run a race on 
the stadium at Olympia, and Epeios, being victorious, was re- 
warded by becoming his successor in the kingdom: it was after 
him that the people were denominated Epeians. 

Both the story here mentioned, and still more, the etymologi 
cal signification of the names Aéthlius and Endymién, seem 
plainly to indicate (as has before been remarked) that this gene- 
alogy was not devised until after the Olympic games had become 
celebrated and notorious throughout Greece. 

Epeios had no male issue, and was succeeded by his nephew 
Eleios, son of Euykydé by the god Poseidén: the name of the 
people was then changed from Epeians to Eleians. A&télus, the 
brother of Epeios, having slain Apis, son of Phoréneus, was com- 
pelled to flee from the country: he crossed the Corinthian gulf - 
and settled in the territory then called Kurétis, but to which he 
gave the name of ZEtélia.2 

The son of Eleios,—or, according to other accounts, of the 
god Hélios, of Poseidén, or of Phorbas,3 —is Augeas, whom we 
find mentioned in the liad as king of the Epeians or Eleians. 
Nestor gives a long and circumstantial narrative of his own ex- 
ploits at the head of his Pylian countrymen against his neighbors 
the Epeians and their king Augeas, whom he defeated with great 
loss, slaying Mulios, the king’s son-in-law, and acquiring a vast 





1 Theocrit. iii.49; xx. 35; where, however, Endymion is connected with 
Latmos in Caria (see Schol. ad loc). 

® Pausan. v. 1. 3-6; Apollodor.i. 7, 6. 

? Apollodér. ii. 5, 5; Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 172. In all probability, the 
vld legend made Augeas the son of the god Hélios: Hélios, Augeas and Aga- 
médé are a triple series parallel to the Corinthian genealogy, Hélios, Aétés 
and Média; not to mention that the etymology of Augeas connects him 
with Helios. Theocritus (xx. 55) designates him as the son of the god Hé- 
lios, through whose favor his cattle are made to prosper and multiply v’th 
such astonishing success (xx.117). 


_—s- ee 


ELEIAN GENEALOGY. 139 


booty.! Augeas was rich in all sorts of rural wealth, and. pos- 
sessed herds of cattle so numerous, that the dung of the animals 
accumulated in the stable or cattle enclosures beyond all power 
of endurance. Eurystheus, as an insult to Héraklés, imposed 
upon him the obligation of cleansing this stable: the hero, dis- 
daining to carry off the dung upon his shoulders, turned the course 
of the river Alpheios through the building, and thus swept the 
encumbrance away.2 But Augeas, in spite of so signala ser- 
vice, refused to Héraklés the promised reward, though his son 
Phyleus protested against such treachery, and when he found that 
he could not induce his father to keep faith, retired in sorrow 
and wrath to the island of Dulichién.3 To avenge the deceit 
practised upon him, Héraklés invaded Elis; but Augeas had 
powerful auxiliaries, especially his nephews, the two Molionids 
(sons of Poseidén by Molioné, the wife of Aktér), Eurytos and 
Kteatos. These two miraculous brothers, of transcendent force, 
grew together, — having one body, but two heads and four arms.4 





1 Tliad, xi. 670-760; Pherekyd. Fragm. 57, Didot. 

? Diodér. iv. 13. "YPpewc Evexev Eipvodede mpooérase xaddpar* b dé ‘Hpa- 
KAng TO pév Toi¢g Guo eeveyneiv abtiv dredoKivaowy, éxkAivor Thy éx THE 
iBpewe aicxivny, etc. (Pausan. v. 1.7; Apolloddr. ii. 5, 5). 

It may not be improper to remark that this fable indicates a purely pasto 
ral condition, or at least a singularly rude state of agriculture; and the way 
in which Pausanias recounts it goes even beyond the genuine story: o¢ xa? 
Ta TOAAA Tho Yapac aitH Hn SiaTeAciv dpya bvra bd Tov Booknudtuv Tie 
kéxpov. The slaves of Odysseus however know what use to make of the 
dung heaped before his outer fence (Odyss. xvii. 299); not so the purely 
carnivorous and pastoral Cyclops (Odyss. ix. 329). The stabling into which 
the cattle go from their pasture, is called xémpo¢ in Homer, —’EAVSotcag é¢ 
Kor pov, éxiv Boravijg Kopéowvrat (Odyss. x. 411): compare Iliad, xviii. 575 
—Mokndud & axd kérpov éxeccevovto rédoves. 

The Augeas of Theocritus has abundance of wheat-land and vineyard, as 
well as cattle: he ploughs his land three or four times, and digs his vine- 
yard diligently (xx. 20-32). 

3 The wrath and retirement of Phyleus is mentioned in the Iliad (ii. 633), 
but not the cause of it. ; 

4 These singular properties were ascribed to them both in the Hesiodic 
poems and by Pherekydés (Schol. Ven. ad Il. xi. 715-750, et ad Il. xxiii. 
638), but not in the Iliad. The poet Ibykus (Fragm. 11, Schneid. ap. Athens. 
11.57) calls thera GAccacg icoxepadove, éveyviove, ’Audorépove yeyadrag év 
Géy apyupéy. 

There were temples and divine honors to Zeus Molién (Lactantius, de 
Falsd Religione. i. 22) 


140 HISTORY OF GREECE 


Such was their irresistible might, that Héraklés was defeated 
and repelled from Elis: but presently the Eleians sent the two 
Molionid brothers as Theéri (sacred envoys) to the Isthmian 
games, and Héraklés, placing himself in ambush at Kleénz, sur- 
prised and killed them as they passed through. For this murder- 
ous act the Eleians in vain endeayored to obtain redress both at 
Corinth and at Argos; which is assigned as the reason for the 
self-ordained exclusion, prevalent throughout all the historical 
age, that no Eleian athléte would ever present himself as a com- 
petitor at the Isthmian games.! The Molionids being thus re- 
moved, Héraklés again invaded Elis, and killed Augeas along- 
with his children,— all except Phyleus, whom he brought over 
from Dulichidn, and put in possession of his father’s kingdom. Ac- 
cording to the more gentle narrative which Pausanias adopts, Au- 
geas was not killed, but pardoned at the request of Phyleus.2 He 
was worshipped as a hero3 even down to the time of that author. 

It was on occasion of this conquest of Elis, according to the old 
mythe which Pindar has ennobled in a magnificent ode, that 
Héraklés first consecrated the ground of Olympia, and established 
the Olympic games. Such at least was one of the many fables 
respecting the origin of that memorable institution.4 

Phyleus, after having restored order in Elis, retired again to 
Dulichién, and left the kingdom to his brother Agasthenés, which 
again brings us into the Homeric series. For Polyxenos, son of 
Agasthenés, is one of the four commanders of the Epeian forty 
ships in the Iliad, in conjunction with the two sons of Eurytos 





? Pausan. v. 2,4, The inscription cited by Pausanias proves that this was 
the reason assigned by the Eleian athlétes themselves for the exclusion; but 
there were several different stories. 

? Apollodér. ii. 7,2. Diodér. iv. 33... Pausan, vy. 2, 2; 3, 2. It seems evi- 
dent from these accounts that the genuine legend represented Héraklés as 
having been defeated by the Molionids : the unskilful evasions both of Apol- 
lodérus and Diodérus betray this. Pindar (Olymp. xi. 25-50) gives the story 
without any flattery to Héraklés. 

3 Pausan. v. 4, 1. 

4 The Amenian copy of Eusebius gives a different genealogy respecting 
Elis and Pisa: Aéthlius, Epeius, Endymién, Alexinus; next G2nomaus and 
Pélops, then Héraklés. Some counted en generations, others three, between 
Héraklés and Iphitus, who renewed the discontinued Olympic games (see 
Armem. Euseb. copy c. xxxii. p. 140). 


EPEIANS AND ELEIANS. 141 


and Kteatos, and with Diérés son of Amarynceus. Megés, the 
son of Phyleus, commands the contingent from Dulichién and the 
Echinades.! Polyxenos returns safe from Troy, is succeeded by 
his son Amphimachos, — named after the Epeian chief who had 
fallen before Troy,— and he again by another Eleios, in whose 
time the Dorians and the Heérakleids invade Peloponnésus.? 
These two names, barren of actions or attributes, are probably 
introduced by the genealogists whom Pausanias followed, to fill 
up the supposed interval between the Trojan war and the Dorian 
invasion. 

We find the ordinary discrepancies in respect to the series and 
the members of this genealogy. Thus some called Epeios son of 
Aéthlius, others son of Endymién:* a third pedigree, which car 
ries the sanction of Aristotle and is followed by Conon, designated 
Eleios, the first settler of Elis, as son of Poseidén and Eurypylé, 
daughter of Endymién, and Epeios and Alexis as the two sons of 
Eleios.4. And Pindar himself, in his ode to Epharmostus the 
Locrian, introduces with much emphasis another king of the 
Epeians named Opus, whose daughter, pregnant by Zeus, was 
conveyed by that god to the old and childless king Locrus: the 
child when born, adopted by Locrus and named Opus, became the 
eponymous hero of the city so called in Locris.5 Moreover Heka- 
tus the Milesian not only affirmed (contrary both to the liad 
and the Odyssey) that the Epeians and the Eleians were different 
people, but also added that the Epeians had assisted Héraklés in 
his expedition against Augeas and Elis; a narrative very differ- 
ent from that of Apollodérus and Pausanias, and indicating besides 
that he must have had before him a genealogy varying from 
theirs.§ 

It has already been mentioned that A&télus, son of Endymidn, 





1 Tliad, ii. 615-630. 2 Pausan. v. 3, 4. 

° Schol. Pindar, Olymp. ix. 86. 

‘ Schol. Ven. ad Il. xi. 687 ; Conén, Narrat. xv. ap. Scriptt. wo West 
p. 130. 

5 Pindar, Olymp. ix. 62: Schol. ibid. 86. ’Oroivro¢ gv Suyatnp "Hiciov 
BastAéuc, jv ’ApiotoréAne KauBionv Karei. 

6 *Exaraioc d& 6 MiAnjotog érépoug Aéyer TOv "HAeiov rode "Ereiove: tH your 
‘Hpakiei cvcrpareioar trode *Exeiovc kat ovvavedcty abt@ rév te Abyéav kat 
tiv "HA (Hekat. ap. Strab. viii. p. 341). 


142 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


quitted Peloponnésus in consequence of having slain Apis.! The 
country on the north of the Corinthian gulf, between the rivere 
Fuénus and Achelous, received from him the name of A®t6lia 
instead of that of Kurétis : he acquired possession of it after having 
slain Dérus, Laodokus and Polypeetes, sons of Apollo and Phthia, 
by whom he had been well received. He had by his wife Pronoé 
(the daughter of Phorbas) two sons, Pleurén and Kalydoén, and 
from them the two chief towns in /Mtolia were named.2 Pleurén 
married Xanthippé, daughter of Dérus, and had for his son Agé- 
nor, from whom sprang Portheus, or Porthaén, and Demoniké: 
Euénos and Thestius were children of the latter by the god 
Arés.3 

Portheus had three sons, Agrius, Melas and Cneus: among 
the offspring of Thestius were Althea and Léda,t — names which 
bring us to a period of interest in the legendary history. Léda 
marries Tyndareus and becomes mother of Helena and the Dios- 
curi: Althea marries CEneus, and has, among other children, 
Meleager and Deianeira; the latter being begotten by the god 
Dionysus, and the former by Arés.5 Tydeus also is his son, the 





} Ephorus said that Atélus had been expelled by Salméneus king of the 
Epeians and Pisate (ap. Strabo. viii. p. 357): he must have had before him a 
different story and different genealogy from that which is given in the text. 

® Apollodér. i. 7,6. Dérus, son of Apollo and Phthia, killed by A®télus, 
after having hospitably received him, is here mentioned. Nothing at all is 
known of this ; but the conjunction of names is such as to render it probable 
that there was some legend connected with them: possibly the assistance 
given by Apollo to the Kuretes against the /Xtolians, and the death of Melea- 
ger by the hand of Apollo, related both in the Eoiai and the Minyas (Pausan. x. 
31, 2), may have been grounded upon it. The story connects itself with what 
is stated by Apollodérus about Dérus son of Hellén (see supra, p. 136). 

S According to the ancient genealogical poet Asius, Thestius was son of 
Agénér the son of Pleurén (Asii Fragm. 6, p. 413, ed. Marktsch.). Compare 
the genealogy of AZtélia and the general remarks upon it, in Braves 
Geschichte des 7Etol. Landes, etc., Berlin, 1844, p. 23 seq. 

4 Respecting Léda, see the statements of Ibykus, Pherekydés, Hellanikus, 
ete. (Schol. Apollén. Rhod. i. 146). The reference to the Corinthiaca of 
Eumélus is curious: it is a specimen of the matters upon which these old 
genealogical poems dwelt. 

° Apollodér. i, 8, 1; Euripidés, Meleager, Frag. 1. The three sons of 
Portheus are named in ‘the lliad (xiv. 116) as living at Pleurén and Kalydén 
The name CEneus doubtless brings Dionysus into the legend. 


ALTHEA AND MELEAGER. 149 


father of Diomédés: warlike eminence goes hand in hand with 
tragic calamity among the members of this memorable family. 
We are fortunate enough to find the legend of Althea and 
Meleager set forth at considerable length in the Iliad, in the 
speech addressed by Phenix to appease the wrath of Achilles. 
C&neus, king of Kalydén, in the vintage sacrifices which he offered 
to the gods, omitted to include Artemis: the misguided man either 
forgot her or cared not for her;! and the goddess, provoked by 
such an insult, sent against the vineyards of Gineus a wild boar, of 
vast size and strength, who tore up the trees by the root and laid 
prostrate all their fruit. So terrible was this boar, that nothing less 
than a numerous body of men could venture to attack him: Melea- 
ger, the son of CEneus, however, having got together a consider- 
able number of companions, partly from the Kurétes of Pleurén, at 
length slew him. But the anger of Artemis was not yet appeased, 
and she raised a dispute among the combatants respecting the pos- 
session of the boar’s head and hide, — the trophies of victory. In 
this dispute, Meleager slew the brother of his mother Althza, prince 
of the Kurétes of Pleurén: these Kurétes attacked the Xtélians 
of Kalyd6n in order to avenge their chief. So long as Meleager 
contended in the field the A&télians had the superiority. But he 
presently refused to come forth, indignant at the curses impre- 
cated upon him by his mother: for Althea, wrung with sorrow 
for the death of her brother, flung herself upon the ground in 
tears, beat the earth violently with her hands, and implored 
Hadés and Persephoné to inflict death upon Meleager, — a prayer 
which the unrelenting Erinnys in Erebus heard but too well. So 
keenly did the hero resent this behavior of his mother, that he 
kept aloof*from the war; and the Kurétes not only drove the 
JEtdlians from the field, but assailed the walls and gates of Kaly- 
don, and were on the point of overwhelming its dismayed inhabi- 
tants. There was no hope of safety except in the arm of Melea- 
ger; but Meleager lay in his chamber by the side of his beautiful 
wife Kleopatra, the daughter of Idas, and heeded not the necessity. 





LH AGN er’, } obk évonoev+ daccaro dé péya Suu (iad, ix.533). The de 
structive influence of Até is mentioned before, vy. 502. The piety of Xenophén 
reproduces this ancient circumstance, — Oivewe & év yjpg ériAaYopévev TH 
Peod, etc. (De Venat. c. i.) 


144 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


While the shouts of expected victory were heard from the assail- 
ants at the gates, the ancient men of A®tdlia and the priests of the 
gods earnestly besought Meleager to come forth,! offering him his 
choice of the fattest land in the plain of Kalydén. His dearest 
friends, his father C&neus, his sisters, and even his mother herself 
added their supplications, but he remained inflexible. At length 
the Kurétes penetrated into the town and began to burn it: at 
this last moment, Kleopatra his wife addressed to him her pathetic 
appeal, to avert from her and from his family the desperate hor- 
rors impending over them all. Meleager could no longer resist 
he put on his armor, went forth from his chamber, and repelled 
the enemy. But when the danger was over, his countrymen with- 
held from him the splendid presents which they had promised, 
because he had rejected their prayers, and had come forth only 
when his own haughty caprice dictated.2 

Such is the legend of Meleager in the Iliad: a verse in the 
second book mentions simply the death of Meleager, without far- 
ther details, as a reason why Thoas appeared in command of the 
Etélians before Troy. Though the circumstance is indicated only 
indirectly, there seems little doubt that Homer must have con- 
ceived the death of the hero as brought about by the maternal 
curse: the unrelenting Erinnys executed to the letter the invoca- 
tions of Althza, though she herself must have been willing to re- 
tract them. 

Later poets both enlarged and altered the fable. The Hesi- 
odic Eoiai, as well as the old poem called the Minyas, represented 
Meleager as having been slain by Apollo, who aided the Kurétes 
in the war; and the incident of the burning brand, though quite 
at variance with Homer, is at least as old as the tragiepoet Phry- 
nichus, earlier than Aischylus.4 The Mocere, or Fates, presenting 
themselyes to Althza shortly after the birth of Meleager, pre- 
dicted that the child would die so soon as the brand then burning 
gn the fire near at hand should be consumed. Althza snatched 
it from the flames and extinguished it, preserving it with the 
nimost care, until she became incensed against Meleager for the 





? These priests formed the Chorus in the Meleager of Sophoklés(Schol 
ed liad. ib. 575). 

? Tliad, ix. 525-595. 3 Tliad, ii. 642. 

‘ Pausan. x. 31.2. The Wrevpdviac, a lost tragedy of Phrynichus. 


Se 


KALYDONIAN BOAR. 145 


death of her brother. She then cast it into the fire, and as soon 
as it was consumed the life of Meleager was brought to a close. 
We know, from the sharp censure of Pliny, that Sophoklés 
heightened the pathos of this subject by his account of the mourn- 
ful death of Meleager’s sisters, who perished from excess of grief. 
They were changed into the birds called Meleagrides, and their 
neyer-ceasing tears ran together into amber.! But in the hands 
of Euripidés — whether originally through him or not,? we can- 
not tell— Atalanta became the prominent figure and motive of 
the piece, while the party convened to hunt the Kalydénian boar 
was made to comprise all the distinguished heroes from every 
quarter of Greece. In fact, as Heyne justly remarks, this event 
is one of the four aggregate dramas of Grecian heroic life,3 along 
with the Argonautic expedition, the siege of Thébes, and the Tro- 
jan war. To accomplish the destruction of the terrific animal 
which Artemis in her wrath had sent forth, Meleager assembled 
not merely the choice youth among the Kurétes and A&télians (as 
we fine in the Iliad), but an illustrious troop, including Kastér and 
Pollux, Idas and Lynkeus, Péleus and Telamén, Théseus and 
Peirithous, Ankzus and Képheus, Jasin, Amphiaraus, Admétus,. 
Eurytién and others. Nestér and Phcenix, who appear as old 
men before the walls of Troy, exhibited their early prowess as 
auxiliaries to the suffering Kalydénians.4 Conspicuous amidst 
them all stood the virgin Atalanta, daughter of the Arcadian 





1 Plin. H. N. xxxvii. 2, 11. 

2 There was a tragedy of Aschylus called ’Ara/avrn, of which nothing 
remains (Bothe, Aischyli Fragm. ix. p. 18). 

Of the more recent dramatic writers, several selected Atalanta as their 


subject (See Brandstater, Geschichte A&toliens, p. 65). 


* There was a poem of Stesichorus, Zvé%npa: (Stesichor. Fragm. 15. p 
72). 

4The catalogue of these heroes is in Apollodor. i. 8,2; Ovid, Metamor. 
viii. 300; Hygin. fab. 173. Euripidés, in his play of Meleager, gave an enu- 
meration and description of the heroes (see Fragm. 6 of that play, ed. Matth.). 
Nestér, in this picture of Ovid, however, does not appear quite so invincible 
as in his own speeches in the Iliad. The mythographers thought it neces- 
sary to assign a reason why Héraklés was not present at the Kalydénian 
adventure: he was just at that time in servitude with Omphalé in Lydia 
(Apoliod. ii. 6,3). This seems to have been the idea of Ephorus, and it is 
much in his style of interpretation (see Ephor. Fragm. 9, ed. Didot.). 

VOL. I. 7 10ec. 


146 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Schceneus ; beautiful and matchless for swiftness of fout, but living 
in the forest as a huntress and unacceptable to Aphrodité.! Seve- 
ral of the heroes were slain by the boar, others escaped by va- 
rious stratagems: at length Atalanta first shot him in the back, 
next Amphiaraus in the eye, and, lastly, Meleager killed him. 
Enamoured of the beauty of Atalanta, Meleager made over to her 
the chief spoils of the animal, on the plea that she had inflicted 
the first wound. But his uncles, the brothers of Thestius, took 
them away from her, asserting their rights as next of kin, if Me- 
leager declined to keep the prize for himself: the latter, exaspe- 
rated at this behavior, slew them. Althea, in deep sorrow for 
her brothers and wrath against her son, is impelled to produce 
the fatal brand which she had so long treasured up, and consign it 
to the flames. The tragedy concludes with the voleesany aps 
both of Althza and Kleopatra. 

Interesting as the Arcadian huntress, Atalanta, is in herself, 
she is an intrusion, and not a very convenient intrusion, into the 
Homeric story of the Kalydénian boar-hunt, wherein another 
female Kleopatra, already occupied the foreground But the 
more recent version became accredited throughout Greece, and 





' Euripid. Meleag. Fragm. vi. Matt. — 

Kirpidog 08 pionu’, Apkac ’Atadivrn, Kovac 
Kai 76 éyovoa, ete. 

There was a drama “ Meleager” both of Sophoklés and Euripidés: of the 
former hardly any fragments remain, — a few more of the latter. 

* Hyginus, fab. 229. 

3 Diodor, iv. 34. Apollodérus (i. 8; 2-4) gives first the usual narnia in- 
cluding Atalanta; next, the Berens narrative with some additional circum- 
stances, but not Snclading either Atalanta or the fire-brand on which Melea- 
ger’s life depended. He prefaces the latter with the words of dé gact, ete 
Antoninus Liberalis gives this second narrative only, without Atalanta, from 
Nicander (Narrat. 2). 

The Latin scenic poet, Attius, had devoted one of his tragedies to this 
subject, taking the general story as given by Euripidés: “ Remanet gloria 
apud me: exuvias dignayi Atalante dare,” seems to be the speech of Melea- 
ger. (Attii Fragm. 8, ap. Poet. Scen. Lat. ed. Bothe, p. 215). The readers 
of the Aneid will naturally think of the swift and warlike virgin Camilla, as 
the parallel of Atalanta. 

‘The narrative of Apollodérus reads awkwardly —Medéaypoe tyws 


yovaina KAcora~pav, Bovadusvoc dé kal &f ’Araddvryg TexvorojoacVa, ete 
(i. 8, 2). 


ATALANTA. 147 


was sustained by evidence which few persons in those days felt 
any inclination to controvert. For Atalanta carried away with her 
the spoils and head of the boar into Arcadia; and there for suc 

cessive centuries hung the identical hide and the gigantic tusks 

of three feet in length, in the temple of Athéné Alea at Tegea. 
Kallimachus mentions them as being there preserved, in the third 
century before the Christian zra;! but the extraordinary value set 
upon them is best proved by the fact that the emperor Augustus 
took away the tusks from Tegea, along with the great statue of 
Athéné Alea, and conveyed them to Rome, to be there preserved 
among the public curiosities. Even a century and a half after- 
wards, when Pausanias visited Greece, the skin worn out with 
age was shown to him, while the robbery of the tusks had not 
been forgotten. Nor were these relics of the boar the only me- 
mento preserved at Tegea of the heroic enterprise. On the 
pediment of the temple of Athéné Alea, unparalleled in Pelo- 
ponnésus for beauty and grandeur, the illustrious statuary Skopas 
had executed one of his most finished reliefs, representing the 
Kalydénian hunt. Atalanta and Meleager were placed in the 
front rank of the assailants, and Ankzeus, one of the Tegean 
heroes, to whom the tusks of the boar had proved fatal,? was 
represented as sinking under his death-wound into the arms of 
his brother Epochos. And Pausanias observes, that the Tegeans, 
while they had manifested the same honorable forwardaess as 
other Arcadian communities in the conquest of Troy, the repulse 
of Xerxés, and the battle of Dipz against Sparta — might fairly 
claim to themselves, through Ankeus and Atalanta, that they 
alone amongst all Arcadians had participated in the glory of the 
Kalydoénian boar-hunt.? So entire and unsuspecting is the faith 





1 Kallimachus, Hymn. ad Dian. 217.— 


Ob pv ExikAgrot Kadvddviot aypevtijpec 
Méugovrat karpoto*. Ta yap onunia vixnce 
*ApKadinn eionAter, Eyer 0° Ere Pnpde ddovrac. 


2 See Pherekyd. Frag. 81, ed. Didot. 

3 Pausan. viii. 45,4; 46, 1-3; 47, 2 Lucian, adv. Indoctum, c. 14. . itt, 
p- 111, Reiz. 

The officers placed in charge of the public curiosities or wonders at Rome 
foi ixi troic Savuacry) affirmed that one of the tusks had been accidentally 


148 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


both of the Tegeans and of Pausanias in the past historical real- 
ity of this romantic adventure. Strabo indeed tries to transform 
the romance into something which has the outward semblance of 
history, by remarking that the quarrel respecting the boar’s head 
and hide cannot have been the real cause of war between the 
Kurétes and the /&tdlians; the true ground of dispute (he con- 
tends) was probably the possession of a portion of territory.! His 
remarks on this head are analogous to those of Thucydidés and 
other critics, when they ascribe the Trojan war, not to the rape of 
Helen, but to views of conquest or political apprehensions. But 
he treats the general fact of the battle between the Kurétes and 
the ZEtélians, mentioned in the Iliad, as something unquestiona- 
bly real and historical — recapitulating at the same time a va- 
riety of discrepancies on the part of different authors, but not 
giving any decision of his own respecting their truth or false- 


In the same manner as Atalanta was intruded into the Kaly- 
dénian hunt, so also she seems to have been introduced into the 
memorabie funeral games celebrated after the decease of Pelias 
at Idlkos, in which she had no place at the time when the works 
on the chest of Kypselus were executed.2 But her native and 
genuine locality is Arcadia; where her race-course, near to the 
town of Methydrion, was shown even in the days of Pausanias.3 
This race-course had been the scene of destruction for more than 





broken in the voyage from Greece: the other was kept in the temple of Bac- 
chus in the Imperial Gardens. 

It is numbered among the memorable exploits of Théseus that he van 
quished and killed a formidable and gigantic sow, in the territory of Krom- 
my6n near Corinth. Actording to some critics, this Krommy6nian sow was 
the mother of the Kalydénian boar (Strabo, viii. p. 380). 

1 Strabo, x. p. 466. TloAguou 0’ éumecdvtog toig Oeoriadate mpde ( ivéa 
kal MeAéaypov, 6 piv Tlounric, audi ovde KepaAg Kat dépuati, kata Thy rept 
rod Karpov puvodroyiav: ag dé 70 elxdc, wept pépove Tio xopac, etc. This 
remark js also similar to Mr. Payne Knight’s criticism on the true causes of the 
Trojan war, which were (he tells us) of a political character, independent of 
Helen and her abduction (Prolegom. ad Homer. c. 53). 

* Compare Apollodér, iii. 9, 2, and Pausan. v. 17, 4.. She is made to 


wrestle with Péleus at these funeral games, which scems foreign to her char- | 
acter. 


* Pausan. viii. 35, 8, 


ATALANTA. 149 


one unsuccessful suitor. For Atalanta, averse to marriage, had 
proclaimed that her hand should only be won by the competitor 
who could surpass her in running: all who tried and failed were 
condemned to die, and many were the persons to whom her 
beauty and swiftness, alike unparalleled, had proved fatal. At 
length Meilanién, who had vainly tried to win her affections by 
assiduous services in her hunting excursions, ventured to enter 
the perilous lists. Aware that he could not hope to outrun her 
except by stratagem, he had obtained by the kindness of Aphro- 
dité, three golden apples from the garden of the Hesperides, 
which he successively let fall near to her while engaged in the 
race. The maiden could not resist the temptation of picking 
‘them up, and was thus overcome: she became the wife of Mei- 
lanién and the mother of the Arcadian Parthenopzus, one of the 
seven chiefs who perished in the siege of Thébes.! 





1 Respecting the varieties in this interesting story, see Apollod. iii. 9, 2; 

Hygin. f. 185; Ovid, Metam. x. 560-700; Propert. i. 1, 20; lian, V. H 
xiii. i. MecAaviwvog cwdpovécrepog. -Aristophan. Lysistrat. 786 and Schol 
In the ancient representation on the chest of Kypselus (Paus. y. 19, 1), 
Meilanién was exhibited standing near Atalanta, who was holding a fawn. 
no match or competition in running was indicated. 
.. There is great discrepancy in the naming and patronymic description of 
the parties in the story. Three different persons are announced as fathers 
of Atalanta, Schoeneus, Jasus and Menalos; the successful lover in Ovid 
(and seemingly in Euripidés also) is called Hippomenés, not Meilanién. In 
the Hesiodic poems Atalanta was daughter of Schoeneus ; Hellanikus called 
her daughter of Jasus. See Apollodér. 1. ¢.; Kallimach. Hymn to Dian. 
214, with the note of Spanheim ; Schol. Eurip. Pheeniss. 150; Schol. Theocr. 
Idyll. iii. 40; also the ample commentary of Bachet de Meziriac, Sur les 
Epitres d’Ovide, vol. i. p. 366. Servius (ad Virg. Eclog. vi. 61; Mneid, iii 
113) calls Atalanta a native of Scyros. 

Both the ancient scholiasts (see Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 769) and the modern 
commentators, Spanheim and Heyne, seck to escape this difficulty by 
supposing two Atalantas,—an Arcadian and a Beedtian: assuming the 
principle of their conjecture to be admissible, they ought to suppose at least 
three. 

Certainly, if personages of the Grecian mythes are to be treated as s his- 
torically real, and their adventures as so many exaggerated and miscolored 
facts, it will be necessary to repeat the process of multiplying entities to an 
infinite extent. And this is one among the many reasons for rejecting the 
fundamental supposition. 

But when we consider these personages as purely legendary, so that an 


150 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


We have yet another female in the family of GEneus, whose 
name the legend has immortalized. His daughter Deianeira was 
sought in marriage by the river Acheléus, who presented himself 
in various shapes, first as a serpent and afterwards as a bull. 
From the importunity of this hateful suitor she was rescued be 
the arrival of Héraklés, who encountered Achelous, vanquished 
him and broke off one of his horns, which Achelous ransomed by 
surrendering to him the horn of Amaltheia, endued with the 
miraculous property of supplying the possessor with abundance 
of any food or drink which he desired. Héraklés was rewarded 
for his prowess by the possession of Deianeira, and he made 
over the horn of Amaltheia as his marriage-present to Gineus.! 
Compelled to leave the residence of CEneus in consequence of 
having in a fit of anger struck the youthful attendant Eunomus, 
and involuntarily killed him,? Héraklés retired to Trachin, cross- 
ing the river Euénus at the place where the Centaur Nessus was 





historical basis can neither be affirmed nor denied respecting them, we es- 
cape the necessity of such inconvenient stratagems. ‘The test of identity is 
then to be sought in the attributes, not in the legal description, —in the 
predicates, not in the subject. Atalanta, whether born of one father or 
another, whether belonging to one place or another, is beautiful, cold, re- 
pulsive, daring, swift of foot and skilful with the how, — these attributes 
constitute her identity. ‘The Scholiast on Theocritus (iii. 40), in vindicating 
his supposition that there were two Atalantas, draws a distinction founded 
upon this very principle: he says that the Beedtian Atalanta was roforic, and 
the Arcadian Atalanta dpouaia. But this seems an over-refinement: both 
the shooting and the running go to constitute an accomplished huntress. 

In respect to Parthenopaus, called by Euripidés and by so many others 
the son of Atalanta, it is of some importance to add, that Apollodérus, 
Aristarchus, and Antimachus, the author of the Thebaid, assigned to him a 
pedigree entirely different, — making him an Argeian, the son of Talaos 
and Lysimaché, and brother of Adrastus. (Apollodér. i. 9,13; Aristarch. 
ap. Schol. Soph. CEd. Col. 1320; Antimachus ap. Schol. Aischyl. Sep. Theb. 
532; and Schol. Supplem. ad Eurip. Phoeniss. t. viii. p. 461, ed. Matth. 
Apollodérus is in fact inconsistent with himself in another passage). 

! Sophokl. Trachin. 7. The horn of Amaltheia was described by Phere- 
kydés (Apollod. ii. 7, 5); see also Strabo, x. p. 458 and Diodér. iv. 35, who 
cites an interpretation of the fables (of elxalovrec é¢ abtav raAndéc) to the 
effect that it was symbolical of an embankment of the unruly river by Hé- 
raklés, and consequent recovery of very fertile land. 

* Hellanikus (ap. Athen. ix. p. 410) mentioning this incident, in two differ 
ent works, called the attendant by two different names. 


(NEUS: — DEIANEIRA. 151 


accustomed to carry over passengers for hire. Nessus carried 
over Deianeira, but when he had arrived on the other side, began 
‘to treat her with rudeness, upon which Héraklés slew him with 
an arrow tinged by the poison of the Lernzan hydra. The dying 
Centaur advised Deianeira to preserve the poisoned blood which 
flowed from his wound, telling her that it would operate asa 
philtre to regain for her the affections of Héraklés, in case she 
should ever be threatened by a rival. Some time afterwards the 
hero saw and loved the beautiful Iolé, daughter of Eurytos, king 
of CEchalia: he stormed the town, killed Eurytos, and made Iolé 
his captive. - The misguided Deianeira now had recourse to her 
supposed philtre: she sent as a present to Héraklés a splendid 
tunic, imbued secretly with the poisoned blood of the Centaur. 
Héraklés adorned himself with the tunic on the occasion of offer- 
ing a solemn sacrifice to Zeus on the promontory of Kénzon in 
Eubea: but the fatal garment, when once put on, clung to him 
indissolubly, burnt his skin and flesh, and occasioned an agony 
of -pain from which he was only relieved by death. Deianeira 
slew herself in despair at this disastrous catastrophe.! 





? The beautiful drama of the Trachinie has rendered this story familiar : 
- compare Apollod. ii. 7, 7.. Hygin. £36. Diodér. iv. 36-37. 

The capture of Cichalia (Olyatiac GAwotc) was celebrated in a very an 
cient epic poem by Kreophylos, of the Homeric and not of the Hesiodic 
character: it passed with many as the work of Homer himself. (See Diint- 
zer, Fragm. Epic. Grecor. p. 8. Welcker, Der Epische Cyclus, p. 229). 
The same subject was also treated in the Hesiodic Catalogue, or in the Eoiai 
(see Hesiod, Fragm. 129, ed. Marktsch.): the number of the children of 
Eurytos was there enumerated. 

This exploit seems constantly mentioned as the last performed by Héra- 
klés, and as immediately preceding his death or apotheosis on Mount (ta: 
but whether the legend of Deianeira and the poisoned tunic be very old, we 
cannot tell. 

The tale of the death of Iphitos, son of Eurytos, by Héraklés, is as ancient 
as the Odyssey (xxi. 19-40): but it is there stated, that Eurytos dying left 
his memorable bow to his son Iphitos (the bow is given afterwards by Iphi- 
tos to Odysseus, and is the weapon so fatal to the suitors), — a statement not 
very consistent with the story that Cichalia was taken and Eurytos slain by 
Héraklés. It is plain that these were distinct and contradictory legends. 
Compare Soph. Trachin. 260-285 (where Iphitos dies before Eurytos), not 
- only with the passage just cited from the Odyssey, but also with Pherekydés, 
Fragm. 34, Didot. 

Hyginus (f. 33) differs altogether in the parentage of Deianeira: he calls 


152 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


We have not yet exhausted the eventful career of CEneus and 
his family — ennobled among the A®tdlians especially, both by 
religious worship and by poetical eulogy — and favorite themes 
not merely in some of the Hesiodic poems, but also in other 
ancient epic productions, the Alkmzénis and the Cyclic Thébais.! 
By another marriage, C2neus had for his son Tydeus, whose 
poetical celebrity is attested by the many different accounts given 
both of the name and condition of his mother. Tydeus, having 
slain his cousins, the sons of Melas, who were conspiring against 
(Eneus, was forced to become an exile, and took refuge at Argos 
with Adrastus, whose daughter Deipylé he married. . The issue 
of this marriage was Diomédés, whose brilliant exploits in the 
siege of Troy were not less celebrated than those of his father at 
the siege of Thébes. After the departure of Tydeus, CEneus 
was deposed by the sons of Agrios, and fell into extreme poverty 
and wretchedness, from which he was only rescued by his grand- 
son Diomédés, after the conquest of 'Troy.2. The sufferings of 
this ancient warrior, and the final restoration and revenge by 
Diomédés, were the subject of a lost tragedy of Euripidés, which 
even the ridicule of Aristophanés demonstrates to have been 
eminently pathetic.? 

Though the genealogy just given of Gineus is in oe Ho- 
meric, and seems to have been followed generally by the mytho- 
graphers, yet we find another totally at variance with it in 
Hekatzus, which he doubtless borrowed from some of the old 
poets: the simplicity of the story annexed to it seems to attest 
its antiquity. Orestheus, son of Deukalién, first passed into 





her daughter of Dexamenos: his account of her marriage with Héraklés is 
in every respect at variance with Apollodérus. In the latter, Mnésimaché 
is the daughter of Dexamenos; H¢raklés rescues her from the importunities 
of the Centaur Euryti6n (ii. 5, 5). 

* See the references in Apollod. i, 8, 4-5. Pindar, Isthm. iv. 32. MeAérav 
8 cogiataic Aid¢ Exart mpdoBadov ceBilouevor ’Ev piv AitwAdy Svotaior 
gaevvaic Olveidat kparepol, etc. 

* Hekat. Fragm. 341, Didot. In this story Gineus is connected with the 
first discovery of the vine and the making of wine (oivoc): compare Hygin. 
f. 129, and Servius ad Virgil. Georgie. i. 9. 

* See Welcker (Griechisch. Tragéd. ii. p. 583) on the lost tragedy called 
Cneus, : 


THE PELOPIDS. 153 


Astélia, and acquired the kingdom: he was father of Phytios, 
who was father of GEneus. A&télus was son of CEneus.! 

The original migration of A®télus from Elis to Gitolia— and 
the subsequent establishment in Elis of Oxylus, his descendant 
in the tenth generation, along with the Dorian invaders of Pelo- 
ponnésus — were commemorated by two inscriptions, one in the 
agora of Elis, the other in that of the /®télian chief town, 
Thermum, engraved upon the statues of A‘télus and Oxylus,2 
respectively. 





CHAPTER VII. 
THE PELOPIDS. 


Amone the ancient legendary genealogies, there was none 
which figured with greater splendor, or which attracted to itself 





? Timoklés, Comic. ap. Athene. vii. p. 223.— 
Tépwr tig druyet ; xaréuater tov Oivéa. 


Ovid. Heroid. ix. 153. — 
“ Heu! devota domus! Solio sedet Agrios alto 
(Enea desertum nuda senecta premit.” 


The account here given is in Hyginus (f. 175): but it is in many points 
different both from Apollodorus (i. 8, 6; Pausan. ii, 25) and Pherekydés 
(Fragm. 83, Didot). It seems to be borrowed from the lost tragedy of Euri- 
pidés. Compare Schol. ad Aristoph. Acharn. 417. Antonin. Liberal. c. 37. 
In the Iliad, Gineus is dead before the Trojan war (ii. 641). 

The account of Ephorus again is different (ap. Strabo. x. p. 462) ; he joins 
Alkmz6n with Diomédés: but his narrative has the air of a tissue of quasi- 
historical conjectures, intended to explain the circumstance that the Atélian 
Diomédés is king of Argos during the Trojan war. 

Pausanias and Apollodérus affirm that Gineus was buried at Ginoé be- 
tween Argos and Mantineia, and they connect the name of this place with 
tim. But it seems more reasonable to consider him as the eponymcas here 
of CEniads in /Etdlia. 


* Ephor. Fragm. 29. Didot ap. Strab. x. 
7* 


154 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


a higher degree of poetical interest and pathos, than that of the 
Pelopids — Tantalus, Pelops, Atreus and Thyestés, Agamemnon 
and Menelaus and gisthus, Helen and Klytemnéstra, Orestés 
and Elektra and Hermioné. Each of these characters is a star 
of the first magnitude in the Grecian hemisphere: each name 
suggests the idea of some interesting romance or some harrowing 
tragedy: the curse which taints the family from the beginning 
inflicts multiplied wounds at every successive generation. So, at 
least, the story of the Pelopids presents itself, after it had been 
successively expanded and decorated by epic, lyric and tragic 
poets. It will be sufficient to touch briefly upon events with 
which every reader of Grecian poetry is more or less familiar, 
and to offer some remarks upon the way in which they were col- 
ored and modified by different Grecian authors. 

Pelops is the eponym or name-giver of the Peloponnésus : to 
find an eponym for every conspicuous local name was the invaria- 
ble turn of Grecian retrospective fancy. The name Peloponnésus 
is not to be found either in the Iliad or the Odyssey, nor any other 
denomination which can be attached distinctly and specially to 
the entire peninsula. But we meet with the name in one of the 
most ancient post-Homeric poems of which any fragments have 
been preserved —the Cyprian Verses—a poem which many 
(seemingly most persons) even of the contemporaries of Herodo- 
tus ascribed to the author of the Iliad, though Herodotus contra- 
dicts the opinion.1 The attributes by which the Pelopid Aga- 
memnon and his house are marked out and distinguished from 
the other heroes of the Iliad, are precisely those which Grecian 
imagination would naturally seek in an eponymus— superior 
wealth, power, splendor and regality. Not only Agamemnén 





* Hesiod. ii. 117. Fragment. Epice. Greece. Diintzer, ix. Kimpca, 8.— 


Alia te Avykeds 
Tavyerov rpocéBatve rooly rayéecot Teradac, 
*Akporatov 0 dvaBdc¢ diedépxeto vicov Gracav 
Tavradidew TéAoroc. 


Also the Homeric Hymn. Apoll. 419, 430, and Tyrteus, Fragm. 1.— 
(Edvopuia) —Etpeiav Médoroc vijcov aguxdueda. 


The Schol. ad Iliad. ix. 246, intimates that the name IeAorévvqoog occurred 
m one or more of the Hesiodic epics. 


WEALTH AND REGALITY OF THE PELUPIDS. 155 


hhaself, but his brother Menelaus, is “more of a king ” evea than 
Nestor or Diomédés. The gods have not given to the king of 
the “much-golden” Mykéne greater courage, or strength, or 
ability, than to various other chiefs ; but they have conferred 
upon him a marked superiority in riches, power and dignity, and 
have thus singled him out as the appropriate leader of the 
forces.1_ He enjoys this preéminence as belonging to a privileged 
family and as inheriting the heaven-descended sceptre of Pelops, 
the transmission of which is described by Homer in a very 
remarkable way. ‘The sceptre was made “by Héphestos, who 
presented it to Zeus; Zeus gave it to Hermés, Hermés to the 
charioteer Pelops ; Pelops gave it to Atreus, the ruler of men; 
Atreus at his death left it to Thyestés, the rich cattle-owner ; 
Thyestés in his turn left it to his nephew Agamemnon to carry, 
that he might hold dominion over many islands and over all 
2 

We have here the unrivalled wealth and power of the “king 
of men, Agamemnon,” traced up to his descent from Pelops, and 
accounted for, in harmony with the recognized epical agencies, 
by the present of the special sceptre of Zeus through the hands 
of Hermés; the latter being the wealth-giving god, whose bless 





1 Tliad, ix. 37. Compare ii. 580. Diomédés addresses Agamemnon - 


Zot dé duavdiya dOxe Kpévov rai¢ dyxvAopgArew 
SKgrtpy pév tot ddxe tetipjodat rept TavTwr* 
*"AAngy O° obtor dOxev, 6, Te KpGTo¢ zor? péytoTov. 


A similar contrast is drawn by Nestér (Il. i. 280) between Agamemnon and 
Achilles. Nestér says to Agamemnon (Il. ix. 60) — 


*Arpeidn, od piv dpye> od yap BacrAebrarég toot. 


And this attribute attaches to Menelaus as well as to his brother. For when 
Diomédés is about to choose his companion for the night expedition inte 
the Trojan camp, Agamemnon thus addresses him (x. 232) : 

Tov piv on Erapév y’ aiphaea, bv x’ E8éAgoSa 

Sarvopévov tov dpiorov, ere? pepcdaci ye ToAAoi - 

Mnéé ob y’ aldduevoc pot dpect, Tov pév dpeiw 

KadAcirew od dé xeipov’ dxdcceat aidoi cixwv, 

"Ec yeveny dpdwr, ei kat Bacidedrepoc éoriv. 

'Q¢ Egat’, Edderce Jé rept EavdG Meveddy. 

* Tiiad, ii. 101. 


156 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


ing is most efficacious in furthering the process of acquisition, 
whether by theft or by accelerated multiplication of flocks and 
herds.! The wealth and princely character of the Atreids were 
proverbial among the ancient epic poets. Paris not only carnes 
away Hellen, but much property along with her:® the house of 
Menelaus, when Télemachus visits it in the Odyssey, is so re- 
splendent with gold and silver and rare ornament, as to strike 
the beholder with astonishment and admiration. ‘The attributes 
assigned to Tantalus, the father of Pelops, are in conformity with 
the general idea of the family — superhuman abundance and en- 
joyments, and intimate converse with the gods, to such a degree 
that his head is turned, and he commits inexpiable sin. But 
though Tantalus himself is mentioned, in one of the most suspi- 
cious passages of the Odyssey (as suffering punishment in the 
under-world), he is not announced, nor is any one else announced, 
as father of Pelops, unless we are to construe the lines in the 
Tliad as implying that the latter was son of Hermés. In the con- 
ception of the author of the Iliad, the Pelopids are, if not of di- 
vine origin, at least a mortal breed specially favored and enno- 
bled by the gods — beginning with Pelops, and localized at My- 
kénz. No allusion is made to any connection of Pelops either 
with Pisa or with Lydia. 

The legend which connected Tantalus and Pelops with Mount 
Sipylus may probably have grown out of the A®olic settlements 
at Magnésia and Kymé. Both the Lydian origin and the Pisatie 
sovereignty of Pelops are adapted to times later than the Iliad, 
when the Olympic games had acquired to themselves the general 
reverence of Greece, and had come to serve as the religious and 
recreative centre of the Peloponnésus —and when the Lydian 





1 Tliad, xiv. 491. Hesiod. Theog. 444. Homer, Hymn. Mercur. 526-568 
"OA Pov Kat rAobrov déow meptxadAdea paBdov. Compare Fustath. ad Iliad, 
xvi. 182. 

2 Tiiad, iii. 72; vii. 363. In the Hesiocic Eoiai was the followiz vouplet 
(Fragm. 55. p. 48, Diintzer) :— 

"AAkhy pev yap EMwxev ‘OAbuTi0¢ Alaxidynerv, 

Nodv & ’Auv8aovidatc, rAodrov & trop’ ’"Arpeidyat. 
Again, Tyrtzus, Fragm. 9, 4, — 

Obs? ei Tavraridew Wédomog BactAebrepog ety, ete. 

* Odvyss. iv. 45-71. 


TANTALUS. 157 


and Phrygian heroic names, Midas and Gygés, were the types 
of wealth and luxury, as well as of chariot driving, in the imag- 
ination of a Greek. The inconsiderable villages of the Pisatid 
derived their whole importance from the vicinity of Olympia: 
they are not deemed worthy of notice in the Catalogue of Homer. 
Nor could the genealogy which connected the eponym of the en- 
tire peninsula with Pisa have obtained currency in Greece unless 
it had been sustained by preéstablished veneration for the locality 
of Olympia. But if the sovereign of the humble Pisa was to be 
recognized as forerunner of the thrice-wealthy princes of Mikéne, 
it became necessary to assign some explanatory cause of his 
riches. Hence the supposition of his being an immigrant, son of 
a wealthy Lydian named Tantalus, who was the offspring of Zeus 
and Plouté. Lydian wealth and Lydian chariot-driving render- 
ed Pelops a fit person to occupy his place in the legend, both as 
ruler of Pisa and progenitor of the Mykenzan Atreids. Even 
with the admission of these two circumstances there is considera- 
ble difficulty, for those who wish to read the legends as consecu- 
tive history, in making the Pelopids pass smoothly and plausibly 
from Pisa to Mykéne. 

I shall briefly recount the legends of this great heroic family 
as they came to stand in their full and ultimate growth, after the 
localization of Pelops at Pisa had been tacked on as a chi to 
Homer’s version of the Pelopid genealogy. 

Tantalus, residing near Mount Sipylus in Lydia, had two chil- 
dren, Pelops and Niobé. He was a man of immense possessions 
and preéminent happiness, above the lot of humanity: the gods 
communicated with him freely, received him at their banquets, 
and accepted of his hospitality in return. Intoxicated with such 
prosperity, Tantalus became guilty of gross wickedness. He 
stole nectar and ambrosia from the table of the gods, and revéal- 
ed their secrets to mankind: he killed and served up to them at 
a feast his own son Pelops. The gods were horror-struck when 
they discovered the meal prepared for them: Zeus restored the 
mangled youth to life, and as Démétér, then absorbed in grief 
for the loss of her daughter Persephoné, had eaten a portion of 
the shoulder, he supplied an ivory shoulder in place of it. Tan- 
talus expiated his guilt by exemplary punishment. He was 
placed in the under-world, w:th fruit and water seemingly close 


158 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


to him, yet eluding his touch as often as he tried to grasp them 
and leaving his hunger and thirst incessant and unappeased.) 
Pindar, in a very remarkable passage, finds this old legend re- 
volting to his feelings: he rejects the tale of the flesh of Pelops 
having been served up and eaten, as altogether unworthy of the 
gods.? 

Niobé, the daughter of Tantalus, was married to Amphion, 
and had a numerous and flourishing offspring of seven sons and 
seven daughters. ‘Though accepted as the intimate friend and 
companion of Léto, the mother of Apoilo and Artemas,3 she was 
presumptuous enough to triumph over that goddess,-and to place 
herself on a footing of higher dignity, on account of the superior 
number of her children. Apollo and Artemas avenged this in- 
sult by killing all the sons and all the daughters: Niobé, thus 
left. a childless and disconsolate mother, wept herself to death, 
and was. turned into a rock, which the later Greeks continued 
always to identify on Mount Sipylus.4 

Some authors represented Pelops as not being a Lydian, but a 
king of Paphlagonia; by others it was said that Tantalus, hav- 
ing become detested from his impieties, had been expelled from 
Asia by Ilus the king of Troy, —an incident which served the 
double purpose of explaining the transit of Pelops to Greece, 
and of imparting to the siege of Troy by Agamemnon the charac- 
ter of retribution for wrongs done to his ancestor.6 When Pe- 
lops came over to Greece, he found Cenomaus, son of the god 
Arés and Harpinna, in possession of the principality of Pisa, 





Dioddr. iv. 77. Hom. Odyss. xi. 582. Pindar gives a different version 
of the punishment inflicted on Tantalus: a vast stone was perpetually im- 
pending over his head, and threatening to fall (Olymp. i.56 ; Isthm. vii. 20). 
2 Pindar, Olymp. i. 45. Compare the sentiment of Iphigeneia in Eurip- 
idés, Iph. Taur. 387. : 
3 Sapphé (Fragm. 82, Schneidewin)— 
Aare kat NioBa para piv gidat hoay éraipar. 


Sapphé assigned to Niobé eighteen children (Aul. Gell. N. A. iv. A. xx. 7); 
Hesiod gave twenty ; Homer twelve (Apollod. iii. 5). 

The Lydian historian Xanthus gave a totally different version both of the 
genealogy and of the misfortunes of Niobé (Parthen. Narr. 33). 

* Ovid, Metam. vi. 164-311. Pausan.i. 21, 5; viii. 2, 3. 

® Apollén. Rhod ii. 358, and Schol.; Ister. Fragment. 59, Dindorf; Die 
Or. iv. 74. 


PELOPS AND GNOMAUS. 159 


immediately bordering on the district of Olympia. CEnomaus, 
having been apprized by an oracle that death would overtake him 
if he permitted his daughter Hippodameia to marry, refused to 
give her in marriage except to some suitor who should beat him 
in a chariot-race from Olympia to the isthmus of Corinth;! the 
ground here selected for the legendary victory of Pelops deserves 
attention, inasmuch as it is a line drawn from the assumed centre 
of Peloponnésus to its extremity, and thus comprises the whole 
territory with which Pelops is connected as eponym. Any suitor 
overmatched in the race was doomed to forfeit his life; and the 
fleetness of the Pisan horses, combined with the skill of the 
charioteer Myrtilus, had already caused thirteen unsuccessful 
competitors to perish by the lance of GEnomaus.? Pelops enter- 
ed the lists as a suitor: his prayers moved the god Poseidén to 
supply him with a golden chariot and winged horses; or accord- 
ing to another story, he captivated the affections of Hippoda- 
meia herself, who persuaded the charioteer Myrtilus to loosen 
the wheels of GEnomaus before he started, so that the latter was 
overturned and perished in the race. Having thus won the hand 
of Hippodameia, Pelops became Prince of Pisa. He put to 
death the charioteer Myrtilus, either from indignation at his 
treachery to CEnomaus,‘ or from jealousy on the score of Hip- 
podameia: but Myrtilus was the son of Hermés, and though 
Pelops erected a temple in the vain attempt to propitiate that 
god, he left a curse upon his race which future calamities were 
destined painfully to work out.5 

Pelops had a numerous issue by Hippodameia: Pittheus, 
Troezen and Epidaurus, the eponyms of the two Argolic cities 


1 Diodor. iv. 74. 

2 Pausanias (vi. 21, 7) had read their names in the Hesiodic Eoiai. 

3 Pindar, Olymp. i. 140. The chariot race of Pelops and GEnomaus was 
represented on the chest of Kypselus at Olympia: the horses of the former 
were given as having wings (Pausan, v. 17,4). Pherekydés gave the same 
story (ap. Schol. ad Soph. Elect. 504). 

4 It is noted by Herodotus and others as a remarkable fact, that no mules 
were ever bred in the Eleian territory: an Eleian who wished to breed a 
mule sent his mare for the time out of the region. The Eleians themselves 
ascribed this phenomenon to a disability brought on the land by a curse 
from the lips of Ginomaus ‘Herod. iv. 80; Plutarch, Quest. Gree. p. 303). 

5 Paus. v. 1,1; Sophok. Elektr. 508; Eurip. Orest. 985, with Schol., 
Plato, Kratyl. p. 395 





160 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


so called, are suid to have been among them: Atreus and Thy- 
estes were also his sons, and his daughter Nikippé married Sthe- 
nelus of Mykénz, and became the mother of Eurystheus.1 We 
hear nothing of the principality of Pisa afterwards: the Pisatid 
villages became absorbed into the larger aggregate of Elis, after 
a vain struggle to maintain their separate right of presidency 
over the Olympic festival. But the legend ran that Pelops left 
his name to the whole peninsula: according to Thucycidés, he 
was enabled to do this because of the great wealth which he had 
brought with him from Lydia into a poor territory. The histo 
tian leaves out all the romantic interest of the genuine legends — 
preserving only this one circumstance, which, without being bet- 
ter attested than the rest, carries with it, from its a 
and prosaic character, a pretended historical plausibility.? . 
Besides his numerous issue by Hippodameia, Pelops had an 
illegitimate son named Chrysippus, of singular grace and beauty, 
towards whom he displayed so much affection as to zouse the 
jealousy of Hippodameia and her sons. Atreus and Thyestés 
conspired together to put Chrysippus to death, for which they 
were banished by Pelops and retired to Mykénz,3— an event 
which brings us into the track of the Homeric legend. . For 
Thucydidés, having found in the death of Chrysippus a suitable 
ground for the secession of Atreus from Pelops, conducts him at 
once to Mykénz, and shows a train of plausible circumstances 
to account for his having mounted the throne. _ Eurystheus, king 
of Mykénz, was the maternal nephew of Atreus: when he 
engaged in any foreign expedition, he naturally entrusted the 
regency to his uncle; the people of Mykénz thus became accus- 
tomed to be governed by him, and he on his part made efforts to 
conciliate them, so that when Eurystheus was defeated and slain 
in Attica, the Mykénzan people, apprehensive of an invasion 
from the Hérakleids, chose Atreus as at once the most powerful 





 Apollod. ii. 4,5. Pausan. ii. 30,8; 26,3; v.8, 1. Hesiod. ap. Schol 
ad Tliad. xx. 116. ; 

® Thucyd. i. 5. 

% We find two distinct legends respecting Chrysippus: his abdnetion by 
Laius king of Thébes, on which the lost drama of Euripidés called Chry- 
sippus turned (see Welcker, Griech. Tragédien, ii. p. 536), and his death by 
he hands of his half-brothers. Hyginus (f. 85) blends the two togetber. 


ATREUS AND THYESTES. 161 


and most acceptable person for his successor.! Such was the tale 
which Thucydidés derived “from those who had learnt ancient 
Peloponnésian matters most clearly from their forefathers.” The 
introduction of so much sober and quasi-political history, unfor- 
tunately unauthenticated, contrasts strikingly with the highly poet- 
ieal lezends of Pelops and Atreus, which precede and follow it. 
Atreus and Thyestés are known in the Iliad only as successive 
possessors of the sceptre of Zeus, which Thyestés at his death 
bequeathes to Agamemnén. The family dissensions among this 
fated race commence, in the Odyssey, with Agamemnén the son 
‘of Atreus, and A®gisthus the son of Thyestés. But subsequent 
poets dwelt upon an implacable quarrel between the two fathers, 
The cause of the bitterness was differently represented: some al- 
leged that Thyestés had intrigued with the Krétan Aeropé, the 
wife of his brother; other narratives mentioned that Thyestés 
procured for himself surreptitiously the possession of a lamb 
with a golden fleece, which had been designedly introduced 
among the flocks of Atreus by the anger of Hermés, as a cause 
of enmity and ruin to the whole family.2 Atreus, after a violent 





1 Thucyd. i. 9. Aéyouos 62 of ra Medorovvycinn cagéctara uviun rapa Tov 
mporeoov dedeypuévor.. According to Hellanikus, Atreus the elder son re- 
turns to Pisa after the death of Pelops with a great army, and makes him- 
self master of his father’s principality (Hellanik. ap Schol. ad Mliad. ii. 105) 
Hellanikus does not seem to have been so solicitous as Thucydidés to bring 
the story into conformity with Homer. The circumstantial genealogy giv- 
en in Schol. ad Eurip. Orest. 5. makes Atreus and Thyestés reside during 
their banishment at Makestus in Triphylia: it is given without any special 
authority, but may perhaps come from Hellanikus. 

2 Hschil. Agamem. 1204, 1253, 1608; Hygin. 86; Attii Fragm.19. This 
was the story of the old poem entitled Alkmzénis ; seemingly also of Phe- 
rekydés, though the latter rejected the story that Hermés had produced the 
golden lamb with the special view of exciting discord between the two broth- 
ers, in order to avenge the death of Myrtilus by Pelops (see Schol. ad 
Eurip. Orest. 996). 

A different legend, alluded to in Soph. Aj. 1295 (see Schol. ad lee.), 
recounted that Aeropé had been detected by her father Katreus in unchaste 
commerce with a low-born person; he entrusted her in his anger tc Nan- 
plius, with directions to throw her into the sea: Nauplius however not only 
spared her life, but betrothed her to Pleisthenés, father of Agamemnén 
and son of Atreus. 

The tragedy entitled Atreus of the Letin poct Attius, seems to have 


VOL. I. 11 oc. 


162 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


burst of indignation, pretended to be reconciled, and invited Thy- 
estés to a banquet, in which he served up to him the limbs of 
his own son, and the father ignorantly partook of the fatal meal. 
Even the all-seeing Hélios is said to have turned back his chariot 
to the east in order that he might escape the shocking spectacle 
of this Thyestéan banquet: yet the tale of Thyestéan revenge 
—the murder of Atreus perpetrated by gisthus, the incestuous 
offspring of Thyestés by his daughter Pelopia— is no less replete 
with horrors.! 

Homeric legend is never thus revolting. Agamemnén and 
Menelaus are known to us chiefly with their Homeric attributes, 
which have not been so darkly overlaid by subsequent poets as 
those of Atreus and Thyestés. Agamemnén and Menelaus are 
affectionate brothers: they marry two sisters, the daughters of 
Tyndareus king of Sparta, Klyteemnéstra and Helen; for Helen, 
the real offspring of Zeus, passes as the daughter of Tyndarius.2 
The “king of men” reigns at Mykénz ; Menelaus succeeds ‘Tyn- 
dareus at Sparta. Of the rape of Helen, and the siege of Troy 
consequent upon it, I shall speak elsewhere: I now touch only 
upon the family legends of the Atreids. Menelaus, on his return 
from Troy with the recovered Helen, is driven by storms far 
away to the distant regions of Pheenicia and Egypt, and is ex- 
posed to a thousand dangers and hardships before he again sets 
foot in Peloponnésus. But at length he reaches Sparta, resumes 
his kingdom, and passes the rest of his days in uninterrupted 
happiness and splendor: being moreover husband of the godlike 
Helen and son-in-law of Zeus, he is even spared the pangs of 
death. When the fulness of his days is past he is transported 
to the Elysian fields, there to dwell along with “the golden-haired 
Rhadamanthus” in a delicious climate and in undisturbed re 
pose.3 

Far different is the fate of -the king of men, Agamemnén. 





brought out, with painful fidelity, the harsh and savage features of this 
family legend (see Aul. Gell. xiii. 2, and the fragments of Attius now remain 
ing, together with the tragedy called Thyestés, of Seneca), 

’ Hygin. fab. 87-88. 

* So we must say, in conformity to the ideas of antiquity: compare Ho 
mer, Iliad, xvi. 176 and Herodot. vi. 53. 

* Hom. Odyss. iii. 280-300; iv. 83-560. 


AGAMEMNON AND MENELAUS. 163 


During his absence, the unwarlike AXgisthus, son of Thyestés, 
had seduced his wife Klytamnéstra, in spite of the special warn- 
ing of the gods, who, watchful over this privileged family, had 
sent their messenger Hermés expressly to deter him from the 
attempt. A venerable bard had been left by Agamemnén as 
the companion and monitor of his wife, and so long as that guar 
dian was at hand, AXgisthus pressed his suit in vain. But he got 
rid of the bard by sending him to perish in a desert island, and 
then won without difficulty the undefended Klyteemnéstra. Igno- 
rant of what had passed, Agamemndén returned from Troy vic- 
torious and full of hope to his native country ; but he had scarcely 
landed when /&gisthus invited him to a banquet, and there with 
the aid of the treacherous Klytemnéstra, in the very hall of fes 
tivity and congratulation, slaughtered him and his companions 
“like oxen tied to the manger.” His concubine Kassandra, the 
prophetic daughter of Priam, perished along with him by the 
hand of Klytamnéstra herself.2 The boy Orestés, the only male 
offspring of Agamemnén, was stolen away by his nurse, and 
placed in safety at the residence of the Phokian Strophius. 

For seven years AXgisthus and Klytemnéstra reigned in tran 
quillity at Mykénz on the throne of the murdered Agamemnon. 
But in the eighth year the retribution announced by the gods over- 
took them: Orestés, grown to manhood, returned and avenged 
his father by killing A®gisthus, according to Homer; subsequent 
poets add, his mother also. He recovered the kingdom of My- 
kéne, and succeeded Menelaus in that of Sparta. Hermioné, the 
only daughter of Menelaus and Helen, was sent into the realm 
of the Myrmidons in Thessaly, as the bride of Neoptolemus, son 
of Achilles, according to the promise made by her father during 
the siege of Troy.3 

Here ends the Homeric legend of the Pelopids, the final act 
of Orestés being cited as one of unexampled glory.4 Later poets 
made many additions: they dwelt upon his remorse and hardly- 





1 Odyss.i. 88; iii. 810. — dva2nidog AlyioGouo, 

2 Odyss. iii. 260-275; iv. 512-537; xi. 408. Deinias in his Argolica, and 
other historians of that territory, fixed the precise day of the murder of 
Agamemn6n,—the thirteenth of the month Gamélién (Schol. ad Sophokl 
Elektr. 275). 

* Odyss. iii 306; iv. 9 4 Odvss. i, 299. 


164 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


earned pardon for the murder of his mother, and upon his de 
voted friendship for Pylades; they wove many interesting tales, 
too, respecting his sisters Iphigeneia and Elektra and his cousin 
Hermioné,— names which have become naturalized in every 
climate and incorporated with every form of poetry. 

These poets did not at all scruple to depart from Homer, and 
to give other genealogies of their own, with respect to the chief 
persons of the Pelopid family. In the Iliad and Odyssey, Aga- 
memnon is son of Atreus: in the Hesiodic Eoiai and in Stesicho- 
rus, he is son of Pleisthenés the son of Atreus.!. In Homer,he 
is specially marked as reigning at Mykénx; but Stesichorus, Si 
monidés and Pindar? represented him as having both resided 
and perished at Sparta or at Amykle. According to the ancient 
Cyprian Verses, Helen was represented as the daughter of Zeus 
and Nemesis: in one of the Hesiodic poems she was introduced 
as an Oceanic nymph, daughter of Oceanus and Téthys.3 The 
genealogical discrepancies, even as to the persons of the principal 
heroes and heroines, are far too numerous to be cited, nor is it 
necessary to advert to them, except as they bear upon the un- 
availing attempt to convert such legendary parentage into a basis 
of historical record or chronological calculation. 

The Homeric poems probably represent that form of the le- 
gend, respecting Agamemnén and Orestés, which was current 
and popular among the /£olic colonists. Orestés was the great 
heroic chief of the Zolic emigration; he, or his sons, or his de- 
scendants, are supposed to have conducted the Achzans to seek 





1 Hesiod. Fragm. 60. p. 44, ed. Dantzer; Stesichor. Fragm. 44, Kleine, 
The Scholiast ad Soph. Elektr. 539, in reference to another discrepancy be- 
tween Homer and the Hesiodic poems about the children of Helen, remarks 
that we ought not to divert our attention from that which is moral and saj- 
utary to ourselves in the poets (Tad 7nd Kal yphowua juiv Toic évrvyxavovar), 
in order to cavil at their genealogical contradictions. 

Welcker in vain endeavors to show that Pleisthenés was originally intre- 
duced as the father of Atreus, not as his son (Griech. Tragéd. p. 678). 

2 Schol. ad Eurip. Orest. 46. "Ounpog év Muxjvatc pyot ra BaotAeia rod 
*Ayapuéuvovog* Xrnaixopoc d? kat L+pwvidyc, év Aaxedatuovig, Pindar, Pyth, 
xi. 31; Nem. viii. 21. Stésichorus had composed an ’Opéereca, copied in 
many boizits from a still more ancient lyric Oresteia by Xanthus : Re 
Athen. xii. p. 513, and lian, V. H. iv. 26. 

* Hesiod, ap. Schol. ad Pindar, Nem. x. 150, 


=, ie _* AGAMEMNON AND ORESTES. 165 


a new home, when they were no longer able to make head against 
the invading Dorians: the great families at Tenedos and other 
ZEolic cities even during the historical era, gloried in tracing 
back their pedigrees to this illustrious source.t' The legends con- 
nected with the heroic worship of these mythical ancestors form 
the basis of the character and attributes of Agamemnén and his 
family, as depicted in Homer, in which Mykénz appears as the 
first place in Peloponnésus, and Sparta only as the second: the - 
former the special residence of “the king of men;” the latter 
that of his younger and inferior brother, yet still the seat of a 
member of the princely Pelopids, and moreover the birth-place 
of the divine Helen. Sparta, Argos and Mykéne are all three 
designated in the Iliad by the goddess Héré as her favorite cities ;2 
yet the connection of Mykénz with Argos, though the two towns 
were only ten miles distant, is far less intimate than the connec- 
tion of Mykéne with Sparta. When we reflect upon the very 
peculiar manner in which Homer identifies Héré with the Grecian 
host and its leader,—for she watches over the Greeks with the 
active solicitude of a mother, and her antipathy against the Tro- 
jans is implacable to a degree which Zeus cannot comprehend, 3 
—and when we combine this with the ancient and venerated 
Hérzon, or temple of Héré, near Mykénxz, we may partly ex- 
plain to ourselves the preéminence conferred upon Mykénz in 
the Iliad and Odyssey. The Héreon was situated between Argos 
and Mykéne; in later times its priestesses were named and its 
affairs administered by the Argeians: but as it was much nearer 





! See the ode of Pindar addressed to Aristagoras of Tenedos (Nem. xi. 
35; Strabo, xiii. p. 582). There were Penthilids at Mityléné, from Penthi- 
lus, son of Orestés (Aristot. Polit. v. 8, 13, Schneid.). 

2 Jiiad, iv. 52. Compare Euripid. Hérakleid. 350 
4 Tliad, iv. 31. Zeus says to Héré,— 
Aaipovin, ti vi oe Iiptauog, Upiayotd re raider 
_ Téoca kad péileoxov 57° domepxic peveaiverc 

"THiov tadamagar tixtipevov xrodieSpor ; 
Ei 62 ob y’, eiceASovoa rida kal Teiyea paxpa, 
’'OQudv BeBpavore Mpiapyov payors re raidac, 
*Ad2ovg Te ToGac, rére kev yoAov taxécaio. 


Again, xviii. 358,— 
h pa vv oeio 


"EE abrir: byévovro Kapnkopowvrec ’Ayatoi. 


166 HISTORY OF GREECK. 


to Mykénz than to Argos, we may with probability conclude that 
it originally belonged to the former, and that the increasing power 
of the latter enabled them to usurp to themselves a religious 
privilege which was always an object of enyy and contention 
among the Grecian communities. ‘The AZolic colonists doubtless 
took out with them in their emigration the divine and heroic 
legends, as well as the worship and ceremonial rites, of the Hé- 
reon; and in those legends the most exalted rank would be as 
signed to the close-adjoining and administering city. 

Mykénz maintained its independence even down to the Persian 
invasion. Eighty of its heavy-armed citizens, in the ranks of 
Leonidas at Thermopyle, and a number not inferior at Platza, 
upheld the splendid heroic celebrity of their city during a season 
of peril, when the more powerful Argos disgraced itself by a 
treacherous neutrality. Very shortly afterwards Mykenz was 
enslaved and its inhabitants expelled by the Argeians. Though 
this city so long maintained a separate existence, its importance 
had latterly sunk to nothing, while that of the Dorian Argos was 
augmented very much, and that of the Dérian Sparta still more. 

The name of Mykénz is imperishably enthroned in the Iliad 
and Odyssey; but all the subsequent fluctuations of the legend 
tend to exalt the glory of other cities at its expense. ‘The recog 
nition of the Olympic games as the grand religious festival of 
Peloponnésus gave vogue to that genealogy which connected Pe- 
lops with Pisa or Elis and withdrew him from Mykéne. More- 
ever, in the poems of the great Athenian tragedians, Mykéne is 
constantly confounded and treated as one with Argos. If any 
one of the citizens of the former, expelled at the time of its final 
subjugation by the Argeians, had witnessed at Athens a drama of 
Eschylus, Sophoklés, or Euripidés, or the recital of an ode of 
Pindar, he would have heard with grief and indignation the city 
of his oppressors made a partner in the heroic glories of his 
own.! But the great political ascendency acquired by Sparta 
contributed still farther to degrade Mykénz, by disposing subse- 
quent poets to treat the chief of the Grecian armament against 
Troy as having been a Spartan. It has been already mentioned 
that Stésichorus, Simonidés and Pindar adopted this version of 


— om 





‘ See the preface of Dissen to the tenth Nem. of Pindar 


AGAMEMNON AT SPARTA. 167 


the legend: we know that Zeus Agamemndn, as well as the here 
Menelaus, was worshipped at the Dorian Sparta,! and the feeling 
of intimate identity, as well as of patriotic pride, which had grawn 
up in the minds of the Spartans connected with the name of 
Agamemnon, is forcibly evinced by the reply of the Spartan Sy- 
agrus to Gelén of Syracuse at the time of the Persian invasion 
of Greece. Gelén was solicited to lend his aid in the imminent 
danger of Greece before the battle of Salamis: he offered to 
furnish an immense auxiliary force, on condition that the supreme 
command should be allotted to him. “ Loudly indeed would the 
Pelopid Agamemnon cry out (exclaimed Syagrus in rejecting this 
application), if he were to learn that the Spartans had been de- 
prived of the headship by Gelén and the Tyracusans.”2 Nearly 
a century before this event, in obedience to the injunctions of the 
Delphian oracle, the Spartans had brought back from Tegea to 
Sparta the bones of “the Lacénian Orestés,” as Pindar denomi- 
nates him:3 the recovery of these bones was announced to them 
as the means of reversing a course of ill-fortune, and of procuring 
victory in their war against Tegea.t The value which they set 
upon this acquisition, and the decisive results ascribed to it, ex- 
hibit a precise analogy with the recovery of the bones of Theseus 
from Skyros by the Athenian Cimén shortly after the Persian 
invasion.5 The remains sought were those of a hero properly 
belonging to their own soil, but who had died in a foreign land, 
and of whose protection and assistance they were for that reason 
deprived. And the superhuman magnitude of the bones, which 
were contained in a coffin seven cubits long, is well suited to the 
legendary grandeur of the son of Agamemndn. 





1 Clemens Alexandr. Admonit. ad Gent. p. 24. "Ayayéuvova yobv tia 
Aia év Sxapry tipdoda: XTapvioc icropei. See also Ginomaus ap. Euseb, 
Preeparat. Evangel. v. 28. 

? Herédot. vii. 159. "H xe péy’ orRioecteD. 6 Iedoridne "Ayapénver, 786 
uevog Lraprintac draparpjotat ryv Hyepoviay bd T'éAwvoc re kat Tov Super 
kovoiwy: compare Homer, Iliad, vii. 125. See what appears to be an imi- 
tation of the same passage in Josephus, De Bello Judaico, iii. 8, 4. "Hl 
uédaaay dv orevaserav ol rarptot vopot, ete. 

*Pindar, Pyth. xi. 16. 4 Herodot. i 68. 

€ Plutarch. Théseus, c. 36, Cimon, c, 8; Pausan. iii. 3, 6. 


168 HISTORY OF GREECE 


CHAPTER VIII. 


LACONIAN AND MESSENIAN GENEALOGIES. 


Tue earliest names in Lacénian genealogy are, an autoct: 
thonous Lelex and a Naiad nymph Kleochareia. From this pair 
sprung a son Eurétas, and from him a daughter Sparta, who be- 
came the wife of Lacedemodn, son of Zeus and Taygeté, daughter 
of Atlas. Amyklas, son of Lacedemon, had two sons, Kynortas 
and Hyacinthus—the latter a beautiful youth, the favorite of 
Apollo, by whose hand he was accidentally killed while playing 
at quoits: the festival of the Hyacinthia, which the Lacedemé- 
nians generally, and the Amykleans with special solemnity, cele- 
brated throughout the historical ages, was traced back to this 
legend. Kynortas was succeeded by his son Periérés, who mar- 
ried Gorgophoné, daughter of Perseus, and had a numerous issue 
— Tyndareus, Ikarius, Aphareus, Leukippus, and Hippokoon. 
Some authors gave the genealogy differently, making Periérés, 
son of Aolus, to be the father of Kynortas, and C&balus son of 


Kynortas, from whom sprung Tyndareus, Ikarius and poi 
koon.! 


Both Tyndareus and Ikarius, expelled by their brétlies Hip- 
pokoon, were forced to seek shelter at the residence of Thestius, 
king of Kalydon, whose daughter, Léda, Tyndareus espoused. 
It is numbered among the exploits of the omnipresent Héraklés, 
that he slew Hippokvon and his sons, and restored Tyndareus to 
his kingdom, thus creating for the subsequent Hérakleidan kings 
a mythical title to the throne. Tyndareus, as well as his brothers, 
are persons of interest in legendary narrative: he is the father 
of Kastér, of Timandra, married to Echemus, the hero of Tegea? 
and of Klytemnéstra, married to Agamemnon. Pollux and the 
ever-memorable Helen are the offspring of Léda by Zeus. Ska- 





1 Compare Apollod. iii. 10, 4. Pausan. iii. 1, 4. 
? Hesiod. ap Schol Pindar. Olymp. xi. 79. 


LACONIAN AND MESSENIAN GENEALOGIES. 169 


mus is the father of Penelopé, wife of Odysseus: the contrast 
between her behavior and that of Klytemnéstra and Helen 
became the more striking in consequence of their being so nearly 
related. Aphareus is the father of Idas and Lynkeus, while 
Leukippus has for his daughters, Phoebé and Ilaéira. Accord- 
ing to one of the Hesiodic poems, Kastér and Pollux were both 
sons of Zeus by Léda, while Helen was neither daughter of Zeus 
nor of Tyndareus, but of Oceanus and Téthys.1 

The brothers Kastor and (Polydeukés, or) Pollux are no less 
celebrated for their fraternal affection than for their great bodily 
accomplishments: Kastdr, the great charioteer and horse-master; 
Pollux, the first of pugilists. They are enrolled both among the 
hunters of the Kalydénian boar and among the heroes of the 
Argonautic expedition, in which Pollux represses the insolence 
of Amykus, king of the Bebrykes, on the coast of Asiatic Thrace 
—the latter, a gigantic pugilist, from whom no rival has ever 
escaped, challenges Pollux, but is vanquished and killed in the 
fight.2 

The two brothers also undertook an expedition into Attica, for 
the purpose of recovering their sister Helen, who had been 
carried off by Théseus in her early youth, and deposited by him 
at Aphidna, while he accompanied Perithous to the under-world, 
in order to assist his friend in carrying off Persephoné. The 
force of Kastér and Pollux was irresistible, and when they re- 
demanded their sister, the people of Attica were anxious to restore 
her: but no one knew where Théseus had deposited his prize. 
The invaders, not believing in the sincerity of this denial, pro- 
ceeded to ravage the country, which would have been utterly 
ruined, had not Dekelus, the eponymus of Dekeleia, been able to 
indicate Aphidna as the place of concealment. The autochtho- 
nous Titakus betrayed Aphidna to Kastér and Pollux, and Helen 





1 Hesiod. ap. Schol. Pindar. Nem. x.150. Fragm. Hesiod. Diintzer, 58. 
p- 44. Tyndareus was worshipped as a god at Lacedeem6n (Varro ap. Serv, 
ad Virgil. Auneid. viii. 275). 

2 Apollon. Rhod. ii. 1-96. Apollod.i.9, 20. Theocrit. xxii. 26-133. In 
the account of Apollonius and Apollodérus, Amykus is slain in the contest; 
in that of Theocritus he is only conquered and forced to give in, witha 
promise to renounce for the future his brutal conduct; there were several 
different narratives. See Schol. Apollon. Rhod. ii. 106. 

vou & 8 


170 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


was recovered: the brothers in evacuating Attica, carried away 
into captivity Acthra, the mother of Théseus. In after-days, 
when Kastér and Pollux, under the title of the Dioskuri, had 
come to be worshipped as powerful gods, and when the Athenians 
were greatly ashamed of this act of Théseus—the revelation 
made by Dekelus was considered as entitling him to the lasting 
gratitude of his country, as well as to the favorable remembrance 
of the Lacedemdnians, who maintained the Dekeleians in the 
constant enjoyment of certain honorary privileges at Sparta,! and 
even spared that déme in all their invasions of Attica. Nor is it 
improbable that the existence of this legend had some weight in 
determining the Lacedzeménians to select Dekelia as the mee of 
their occupation during the Peleponnésian war. 

The fatal combat between Kastér and Polydeukés on the one 
side, and Idas and Lynkeus on the other, for the possession of 
the daughters of Leukippus, was celebrated by more than one 
ancient poet, and forms the subject of one of the yet remaining 
Idylls of Theocritus. Leukippus had formally betrothed his 
daughters to Idas and Lynkeus; but the Tyndarids, becoming 
enamored of them, outbid their rivals in the value of the cus- 
tomary nuptial gifts, persuaded the father to violate his promise, ™ 
and carried off Phoebé and Ilaéira as their brides. Idas and 
Lynkeus pursued them and remonstrated against the injustice: 
according to Theocritus, this was the cause of the combat. But 
there was another tale, which seems the older, and which assigns 
a different cause to the quarrel. The four had jointly made a 
predatory incursion into Arcadia, and had driven off some cattle, — 
but did not agree about the partition of the booty —Idas carried 
off into Messénia a portion of it which the Tyndarids claimed as 





1 Diodér. iv. 63. Herod. iv. 73. AexeAéwv dé TOv Tore Epyacapuévor Ep- 
yov xphoinov tc Tov wavta xpovor, a¢ abto? "ADyvaio Aéyovot. According 
to other authors, it was Akadémus who made the revelation, and the spot 
called Akadémia, near Athens, which the Laccdeménians spared in con- 
sideration of this service (Plutarch, Théseus, 31, 32, 33, where he gives 
several different versions of this tale by Attic writers, framed with the view 
of exonerating Thésens). ‘The recovery of Helen and the captivity of Aithra 
were represented on the ancient chest of Kypselus, with the following eurious 
inscription : 
Tvvdapida ‘ EAévay teat Aidpav & ’AVEévadev 
"EAkerov. Pausan. v.19 1 


ee ee ee 


KASTOR AND POLLUX. 171 


their own. ‘To revenge and reimburse themselves, the Tyndarids 
invaded Messénia, placing themselves in ambush in the hollow of 
an ancient oak. But Lynkeus, endued with preterriatural pow- 
ers of vision, mounted to the top of Taygetus, from whence, as he 
could see over the whole Peleponnésus, he detected them in their 
chosen place of concealment. Such was the narrative of the 
ancient Cyprian Verses. Kastér perished by the hand of Idas, 
Lynkeus by that of Pollux. Idas, seizing a stone pillar from the 
tomb of his father Aphareus, hurled it at Pollux, knocked him 
down and stunned him; but Zeus, interposing at the critical 
moment for the protection of his son, killed Idas with a thunder- 
bolt. Zeus would have conferred upon Pollux the gift of immor- 
tality, but the latter could not endure existence without his brother: 
he entreated permission to share the gift with Kastor, and both 
were accordingly pe>mitted to live, but only on every other day.! 

The Dioskuri, or sons of Zeus, — as the two Spartan heroes, 
Kastor and Pollux, were denominated, — were recognized in the 
historical days of Greece as gods, and received divine honors. 
This is even noticed in-a passage of the Odyssey,? which is at any 
rate a very old interpolation, as well as in one of the Homeric 
hymns.. What is yet more remarkable is, that they were invoked 
during storms at sea, as the special and all-powerful protectors of 
the endangered mariner, although their attributes and their 
celebrity seem to be of a character so dissimilar.. ‘They were 
worshipped throughout most parts of Greece, but with preéminent 
sanctity at Sparta. 

Kastor and Pollux being removed, the Spartan genealogy 
passes from Tyndareus to Menelaus, and from him to Orestés. 

Originally it appears that Messéné was a name for the western 
portion of Lacénia, bordering on what was called Pylos: it is so 
represented in the Odyssey, and Ephorus seems to have included 
it amongst the possessions. of Orestés and his descendants. 





' Cypria. Carm. Fragm. 8. p. 13, Diintzer. Lycophron, 538-566 with 
Schol.. Apollod. iii. 11,1. Pindar, Nem. x. 55-90. érepyuepov adavaciar - 
also Homer, Odyss. xi.302, with the Commentary of Nitzsch, vol. iii. p. 245. 

The combat thus ends more favorably to the ‘Tyndarids; but probably the 
account least favorable to them is the oldest, since their dignity went on con 
tinually increasing, until at last they became great deities. 

? Odyss. xxi. 15. Diodor. xv. 66. 


172 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Throughout the whole duration of the Messénico-Dorian king: 
dom, there never was any town called Messéné: the town was 
first founded by Epameinondas, after the battle of Leuctra. The 
heroic genealogy of Messénia starts from the same name as that 
of Lacénia—from the autochthonous Lelex: his younger son, 
Polykaén, marries Messéné, daughter of the Argeian Triopas, 
and settles the country. Pausanias tells us that the posterity of 
this pair occupied the country for five generations; but he in 
vain searched the ancient genealogical poems to find the names 
of their descendants.! To them succeeded Periérés, son of 
ZEolus; and Aphareus and Leukippus, according to Pausanias, 
were sons of Periérés. Idas and Lynkeus are the only heroes, 
distinguished for personal exploits and memorable attributes, 
belonging to Messénia proper. They are. the counterpart of the 
Dioskuri, and were interesting persons in the old legendary 
poems. Marpéssa was the daughter of Euénus, and wooed by 
Apollo: nevertheless Idas® carried her off by the aid of a winged 
chariot which he had received from Poseidén, Euénus pursued 
them, and when he arrived at the river Lykormas, he found 
himself unable to overtake them: his grief caused him to throw 
himself into the river, which ever afterwards bore hisname. Idas 
brought Marpéssa safe to Messénia, and even when Apollo there 
claimed her of him, he did not fear to risk a combat with the god. 
But Zeus interfered as mediator, and permitted the maiden to 
choose which of the two she preferred. She attached herself to 
Idas, being apprehensive that Apollo would desert her in her old 
age: on the death of her husband she slew herself. Both Idas 
and Lynkeus took part in the Argonautic expedition and in 
the Kalydénian boar-hunt.8 





1 Pausan. iv. 2, 1. 

? Tliad, ix. 553. Simonidés had handled this story in detail (Schol. Ven. 
IL ix. p. 553). Bacchylidés (ap, Schol. Pindar. Isthm. iv. 92) celebrated in 
one of his poems the competition among many eager suitors for the hand of 
Marpéssa, under circumstances similar to the competition for Hippodamceia, 
daughter of GEnomaus. Many unsuccessful suitors perished by the hand of 
Euénas: their skulls were affixed to the wall of the temple of Poseid6n. 

* Apollod. i. 7, 9. Pausan. iv. 2,5. Apollénius Rhodius describes Idas as 
full of boast and self-confidence, heedless of the necessity of divine aid. . 
Trobably this was the character of the brothers in the old legend, as the 
enemies of the Dioskuri. 

The wrath of the Dioskuri against Messénia was treated, even in the 


ee Dl 


hatin aati ee 


—— ae 


ARCADIAN GENEALOGY. 173 


_ Aphareus, after the death of his sons, founded the tuwn of 
Aréné, and made over most part of his dominions to his kinsman 
Néleus, with whom we pass into the Pylian genealogy. 





CHAPTER IX. 
ARCADIAN GENEALOGY. 


{fue Arcadian divine or heroic pedigree begins with Pelasgus, 
whom both Hesiod and Asius considered as an indigenous man, 
though Akusilaus the Argeian represented him as brother of 
Argos and son of Zeus by Niobé, daughter of Phorédneus: this 
logographer wished to establish a community of origin between 
the Argeians and the Arcadians. 

Lykaén, son of Pelasgus and king of Arcadia, had, by different 
wives, fifty sons, the most savage, impious and wicked of man- 
kind: Meenalus was the eldest of them. Zeus, in order that he 
might himself become a witness of their misdeeds, presented 
himself to them in disguise. They killed a child and served it 
up to him for a meal; but the god overturned the table and 
struck dead with thunder Lykaén and all his fifty sons, with the 
single exception of Nyktimus, the youngest, whom he spared at 
the earnest intercession of the goddess Ga (the Earth). The 
town near which the table was overturned received the name of 
Trapezus (‘Tabletown). 

This singular legend (framed on the same etymological type 
as that of the ants in A%gina, recounted elsewhere) seems ancient, 
and may probably belong to the Hesiodic Catalogue. But Pau- 
sanias tells us a story in many respects different, which was 
represented to him in Arcadia as the primitive local account, and 
which becomes the more interesting, as he tells us that he himself 
fully believes it. Both tales indeed go to illustrate the same 
historical times, as the grand cause of the subjection of the Messénians by 
the Spartans: that wrath had been appeased at the time when Epameinondas 
reconstituted Messéné (Pausan. iv. 27, 1). 





174 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


point —the ferocity of Lykaén’s character, as well as the cruel 
rites which he practised. The latter was the first who established 
the worship and solemn games of Zeus Lykus: he offered up a 
child to Zeus, and made libations with the blood upon the altar. 
Immediately after having perpetrated this act, he was changed 
into a wolf.! 

“Of the truth of this narrative (observes Pausanias) I feel 
persuaded: it has been repeated by the Arcadians from old times, 
and it carries probability along with it. For the men of that day, 
from their justice and piety, were guests and companions at table 
with the gods, who manifested towards them approbation when 
they were good, and anger if they behaved ill, in a palpable man- 
ner: indeed at that time there were some, who having once been 
men, became gods, and who yet retain their privileges as such — 
Aristzus, the Krétan Britomartis, Héraklés son of Alkména, Am- 
phiaraus the son of Oiklés, and Pollux and Kastor besides. We 
may therefore believe that Lykaédn became a wild beast, and that 
Niobé, the daughter of Tantalus, became a stone. But in my 
time, wickedness having enormously increased, so as to overrun 
the whole earth and all the cities in it, there are no farther 
examples of men exalted into gods, except by mere title and from 
adulation towards the powerful: moreover the anger of the gods 
falls tardily upon the wicked, and is reserved for them after their 
departure from hence.” 





? Apollodér. iii. 8,1. Hygin. fab. 176. Eratosthen. Catasterism. 8. Pau- 
san. viii. 2, 2-3. A different story respecting the immolation of the child is 
in Nikolaus Damask. Frag. p. 41, Orelli. Lykaén is mentioned as the first 
founder of the temple of Zeus Lykeus in Schol. Eurip. Orest. 16625 but 
nothing is there said about the human sacrifice or its consequences, In the 
historical times, the festival and solemnities: of the Lykza do not seem to 
have been distinguished materially from the other agénes of Greece (Pindar, 
Olymp. xiii. 104; Nem. x. 46): Xenias the Arcadian, one of the generals 
in the army of Cyrus the younger, celebrated the solemnity with great mag- 
nificence in the march through Asia Minor (Xen. Anab. i. 2, 10). But the 
fable of the human sacrifice, and the subsequent transmutation of the person 
who had eaten human food into a wolf, continued to be told in connection 
with them (Plato, de Republic. viii. c. 15. p. 417). Compare Pliny, H. N. 
viii. 34. This passage of Plato seems to afford distinct indication that the 
practice of offering human victims at the altar of the Lykw#an Zeus was 
neither prevalent nor recent, but at most only traditional and antiquated’ 
and it therefore limits the sense or invalidates the authority of the Pseudo 
Platonic dialogue, Minos, c. 5. 


LYKAON AND HIS SONS. 175 


Pausanias then proceeds to censure those who, by multiplying 
false miracles in more recent times, tended to rob the old and 
genuine miracles of their legitimate credit and esteem. The 
passage illustrates forcibly the views which a religious and in- 
structed pagan took of his past time — how inseparably he blend- 
ed together in it gods and men, and how little he either recognized 
or expected to find in it the naked phenomena and historical 
laws of connection which belonged to the world before him. He 
treats the past as the province of legend, the present as that of 
history ; and in doing this he is more sceptical than the persons 
with whom he conversed, who believed not only in the ancient, 
but even in the recent and falsely reported miracles. It is true 
that Pausanias does not always proceed consistently with this 
position: he often rationalizes the stories of the past, as if he 
expected to find historical threads of connection ; and sometimes, 
though more rarely, accepts the miracles of the present. But in 
the present instance he draws a broad line of distinction between 
present and past, or rather between what is recent and what. is 
ancient: his criticism is, in the main, analogous to that of Arrian in 
regard to the Amazons — denying their existence during times 
of recorded history, but admitting it during the early and un- 
recorded ages. 

Tn the narrative of Pausanias, the sons of Lykadn, instead of 
perishing by thunder from Zeus, become the founders of the 
various towns in Arcadia. And as that region was subdivided 
into a great number of small and independent townships, each 
having its own eponym, so the Arcadian heroic genealogy appears 
broken up and subdivided. Pailas, Orestheus, Phigalus, Trape- 
zeus, Mzenalus, Mantinéus, and Tegeatés, are all numbered among 
the sons of Lykadn, and are all eponyms of various. Arcadian 
towns.! 

The legend respecting Kallist6é and Arkas, the eponym of 
Areadia generally, seems to have been originally quite independ 
ent of and distinct from that of Lykaén. Eumélus, indeed, and 
some other poets made Kallisté daughter of Lykaén ; but neither 
Hesiod, nor Asius, nor Pherekydés, acknowledged any relation- 
ship between them.2 The beautiful Kallistd, companion of 





1 Paus. vui.3. Hygin. fab. 177. *--® Apollod. iii. 8, 2. 


176 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Artemis in the ckase, had bound herself by a vow of chastity 
Zeus, either by persuasion or by force, obtained a violation of the 
vow, to the grievous displeasure both of Héré and Artemis. The 
former changed Kallisté into a bear, the latter when she was in 
that shape killed her with an arrow. Zcus gave to the unfortu- 
nate Kallist6é a place among the stars, as the constellation of the 
Bear: he also preserved the child Arkas, of which she was 
pregnant by him, and gave it to the Atlantid nymph Maia to 
bring up.! 

Arkas, when he became king, obtained from Triptolemus and 
communicated to his people the first rudiments of agriculture ; 
he also taught them to make bread, to spin, and to weave. He 
had three sons — Azan, Apheidas, and Elatus: the first was the 
eponym of Azania, the northern region of Arcadia; the second 
was one of the heroes of Tegea; the third was father of Ischys 
(rival of Apollo for the affections of Korénis), as well as of 
ZEpytus and Kyllén: the name of A®pytus among the heroes of 
Arcadia is as old as the Catalogue in the Iliad.2 

Aleus, son of Apheidas and king of Tegea, was the founder 
of the celebrated temple and worship of Athéné Alea in that 
town. Lykurgus and Képheus were his sons, Augé his daugh- 
ter, who was seduced by Heéraklés, and secretly bore to him a 
child: the father, discovering what had happened, sent Augé to 
Nauplius to be sold into slavery: Teuthras, king of Mysia in 
Asia Minor, purchased her and made her his wife: her tomb was 
shown at Pergamus on the river Kaikus even in the time of 
Pausanias.° 

’ Pausan. viii. 3,2. Apollod. iii. 8,2. Hesiod. apud Eratosthen. Catas- 
terism. 1. Fragm. 182, Marktsch. Hygin. f. 177. 

? Homer, Iliad, ii. 604. Pind. Olymp. vi. 44-63. 

The tomb of Zpytus, mentioned in the Iliad, was shown to Pausanias 
between Pheneus and Stymphalus (Pausan. viii. 16,2). &pytus was a cog- 
nomen of Hermés (Pausan. viii. 47, 3). 

The hero Arkas was worshipped at Mantineia, under the special injune- 
tion of the Delphian oracle (Pausan. viii. 9, 2). 

§ Pausan. viii. 4,6. Apollod. iii. 9,1. Dioddr. iv. 33. 

A separate legend respecting Augé and the birth of Télephus was current 
at Tegea, attached to the temple, statue, and cognomen of Eileithyia in the 
Tegeatic agora (Pausan. viii. 48, 5). 

Hekateus seems to have ‘narrated in detail the adventures of Augé (Pau- 
san. vill. 4,4; 47,3. Hekate. Fragm. 345, Didot.). 

Euripidés followed a different story about Augé and the birth of Télephue 





TELEPHUS. 177 


The child Télephus, exposed on Mount Parthenius, was won- 
derfully sustained by the milk of a doe: the herdsmen of Kory- 
thus brought him up, and he was directed by the Delphian oracle 
to go and find his parents in Mysia. ‘Teuthras adopted him, and 
he succeeded to the throne: in the first attempt of the army of 
Agamemnon against ‘Troy, on which occasion they mistook their 
point and landed in Mysia, his valor signally contributed to the 
repulse of the Greeks, though he was at last vanquished and 
desperately wounded by the spear of Achilles —— by whom how- 
ever he was afterwards healed, under the injunction of the ora- 
cle, and became the guide of the Greeks in their renewed attack 
upon the Trojans.! 

From Lykurgus,? the son of Aleus and brother of Augé, we 
pass to his son Ankzeus, numbered among the Argonauts, finally 
killed in the chase of the Kalydénian boar, and father of Agape- 
nor, who leads the Arcadian contingent against Troy, — (the 
adventurers of his niece, the Tegeatic huntress Atalanta, have 
already been touched upon),— then to Echemus, son of Aéropus 
and grandson of the brother of Lykurgus, Képheus. Echemus 
is the chief heroic ornament of Tegea. When Hyllus, the son 
of Héraklés, conducted the Hérakleids on their first expedi- 
tion against Peloponnésus, Echemus commanded the Tegean 
troops who assembled along with the other Peloponnésians at the 
isthmus of Corinth to repel the invasion: it was agreed that the 
dispute should be determined by single combat, and Echemus, as 
the champion of Peloponnésus, encountered and killed Hyllus. 


in his lost tragedy called Augé (See Strabo, xiii. p. 615). Respecting the 
Mvoo? of AEschylus, and the two lost dramas, ’AAeada? and Muooi of Sopho- 
klés, little can be made out. (See Welcker, Griechisch. Tragéd. p. 53, 
408-414). 

! Télephus and his exploits were much dwelt upon in the lost old epic 
poem, the Cyprian Verses. See argument of that poem ap. Ddntzer, 
Ep. Fragm. p.10. His exploits were also celebrated by Pindar (Olymp. 
ix. 70-79); he is enumerated along with Hector, Cycnus, Memnon, the 
most distinguished opponents of Achilles (Isthm. iv. 46). His birth, as 
well as his adventures, became subjects with most of the great Attic trage- 
dians. 

2 There were other local genealogies of Tegea deduced from Lykurgus: 
Bétachus, eponym of the Déme Botachide at that place, was his grandson 
(Nicolaus ap. Steph. Byz. v. Burayidar). 

VOL. I. 8* 12o0¢. 





178 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Pursuant to the stipulation by which they had bound themselves, 
the Hérakleids retired, and abstained for three generations from 
pressing their claim upon Peloponnésus. This valorous exploit of 
their yreat martial hero was cited and appealed to by the Tegeates 
before the battle of Platea, as the principal evidence of their 
claim to the second post in the combined army, next in point of 
honor to that of the Lacedzménians, and superior to that of the 
Athenians: the latter replied to them by producing as counter-evi- 
dence the splendid heroic deeds of Athens, — the protection of the 
Hérakleids against Eurystheus, the victory over the Kadmeians 
of Thébes, and the complete defeat of the Amazons in Attica,! 
Nor can there be any doubt that these legendary glories were 
both recited by the speakers, and heard by the listeners, with 
profound and undoubting faith, as well as with heart-stirring 
admiration. 
One other person there is—Ischys, son of Elatus and grand 
son of Arkas—in the fabulous genealogy of Arcadia whom it 
would be improper to pass over, inasmuch as his name and 
adventures are connected with the genesis of the memorable god 
or hero Aisculapius, or Asklépius. Kordnis, daughter of Phleg- 
yas, and resident near the lake Boebéis in Thessaly, was beloved 
by Apollo and became pregnant by him: unfaithful to the god, 
she listened to the propositions of Ischys son of Elatus, and con- 
sented to wed him: a raven brought to Apollo the fatal news, 
which so incensed him that he changed the color of the bird 
from white, as it previously had been, into black.2 Artemis, to 





 Herodot. ix. 27. Echemus is described by Pindar (Ol. xi. 69) as gaining 
the prize of wrestling in the fabulous Olympic games, on their first estab- 
lishment by Héraklés. He also found a place in the Hesiodic Catalogue as 
husband of Timandra, the sister of Helen and Klytsemnéstra (Hesiod. 
Fragm. 105, p. 318, Marktscheff.). 

? Apollodér. iii. 10,3; Hesiod, Fragm. 141-142, Marktscheff.; Strab. is 
p. 442; Pherekydés, Fragm. 8; Akusilaus, Fragm. 25, Didot. 


TO piv dp’ dyyedoc HAVe xopaék, lepie ard daird¢ 
Tludo é¢ hyaténv, xai p’ Eppacev Epy’ aidnra 

Ho0iBw axepoekoun, bre "loyve ye Képwvev 

Eidaridne, bAeyiao dtoyvmrowo Siyarpa. (Hesiod, Fr.) 


The change of the color of the crow is noticed both in Ovid, Metamorph 
ii. 632, in Antonin. Liberal. c. 20, and in Servius ad Virgil. Zeid. vii. 761 


ASKLEPIUS. 179 


avenge the wounded dignity of her brother, put Kordénis to 
death; but Apollo preserved the male child of which she was 
about to be delivered, and consigned it to the Centaur Cheirén to 
be brought up. The child was named Asklépius or Asculapius, 
and acquired, partly from the teaching of the beneficent leech 
Cheir6n, partly from inborn and superhuman aptitude, a, knowl- 
edge of the virtues of herbs and a mastery of medicine and sur- 
gery, such as had never before been witnessed. He not only 
cured the sick, the wounded, and the dying, but even restored the 
dead to life. Kapaneus, Eriphylé, Hippolytus, Tyndareus and 
Glaukus were all affirmed by different poets and logographers to 
have been endued by him with a newlife.! But Zeus now found 
himself under the necessity of taking precautions lest mankind, 
thus unexpectedly protected against sickness and death, should 
no longer stand in need of the immortal gods: he smote Asklé- 
pius with thunder and killed him. Apollo was so exasperated 
by this slaughter of his highly-gifted son, that he killed the 
Cyclépes who had fabricated the thunder, and Zeus was about to 
condemn him to Tartarus for doing so; but on the intercession 
of Latdna he relented, and was satisfied with imposing upon him 
a temporary servitude in the house of Admétus at Phere. 
Asklépius was worshipped with very great solemnity at Trikka, 
at Kés, at Knidus, and in many different parts of Greece, but espe- 
cially at Epidaurus, so that more than one legend had grown up 





though the name “ Corvo custode cjus” is there printed with a capital letter, 
as if it were a man named Corvus. 

1 Schol. Eurip. Alkést. 1; Dioddr. ivy. 71; Apollodér. iii. 10,3; Pindar, 
Pyth. iii. 59; Sextus Empiric. adv. Grammatic. i. 12. p. 271. Stesichorus 
named Eriphylé—the Naupaktian verses, Hippolytus— (compare Servius 
ad Virgil. Aineid. vii. 761) ; Panyasis, Tyndareus; a proof of the popularity 
of this tale among the poets.. Pindar says that A’sculapius was “ tempted by 
gold” to raise a man from the dead, and Plato (Legg. iii. p. 408) copies 
him: this seems intended to afford some color for the subsequent punish- 
ment. “Mercede id captum (observes Boeckh. ad Pindar. 1.c.) Aiscula- 
pium fecisse recentior est fictio; Pindari fortasse ipsius, quem tragici secuti 
sunt: haud dubie a medicorum ayaris moribus profecta, qui Greecorum 
medicis nostrisque communes sunt.” The rapacity of the physicians (grant- 
ing itto be ever so well-founded, both then and now) appears to me. less 
likely to have operated upon the mind of Pindar, than the disposition te 
extenuate the cruelty of Zeus, by imputing guilty and sordid views to Asklé 
pius. Compare the citation from Diksarchus, infra p. 249, note 1. 


180 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


-especting the details of his birth and advaneiloan in particular, 
his mother was by some called Arsinoé. But a formal applica. 

-tion had been made on this subject (so the Epidaurians told 
Pausanias) to the oracle of Delphi, and the god in reply acknowl- 
edged that Asklépius was his son by Koronis.!' The tale above 
recounted seems to have been both the oldest and the most cur- 
rent. It is adorned by Pindar in a noble ode, wherein however 
he omits all mention of the raven as messenger — not specifying 
who or what the spy was frgm whom Apollo learnt the infidelity 
of Korénis. By many this was considered as an improvement in 
respect of poetical effect, but it illustrates the mode in which the 
characteristic details and simplicity of the old fables? came to be 
exchanged for dignified generalities, adapted to the altered taste 
of society. 

Machadn and Podaleirius, the two sons of Asklépius, com 
mand the contingent from Trikka, in the north-west region of 
Thessaly, at the siege of Troy by Agamemnén.3 They are the 
leeches of the Grecian army, highly prized and consulted by all 
the wounded chiefs. Their medical renown was further pro- 
longed in the subsequent poem of Arktinus, the Iliu-Persis, 
wherein the one was represented as unrivalled in surgical opera- 
tions, the other as sagacious in detecting and appreciating morbid 
symptoms. It was Podaleirius who first noticed the glaring 





1 Pausan. ii. 26, where several distinct stories are mentioned, each spring 
ing up at some one or other of the sanctuaries of the god: quite enough to 
justify the idea of these Aisculapii (Cicero, N. D. iii. 22). 

Homer, Hymn. ad Aisculap. 2. The tale briefly alluded to in the Homeric 
Hymn. ad Apollin. 209. is evidently different: Ischys is there the companion 
of Apollo, and Korénis is an Arcadian damsel. 

Aristidés, the fervent worshipper of Asklépius, adopted the story of Kord- 
nis, and composed hymns on the yayov Kopwridos nat yéveciy tod Deor 
(Orat. 23. p. 463, Dind.). 

* See Pindar, Pyth. iii: The Scholiast puts a construction upon Pindar’s 
words which is at any rate far-fetched, if indeed it be at all admissible: he 
supposes that Apollo knew the fact from his own omniscience, without any in- 
formant, and he praises Pindar for having th 1s transformed the old fable. But 
the words odd’ éAad_e oxérov seem certainly to imply some informant: te 
suppose that cxéov means the god’s own mind, is a strained interpretation. _ 

* Tliad, ii. 730. The Messénians laid claim to the sons of Asklépius as 
their heroes, and tried to justify the pretension by a forced construction of 
Homer (Pausan. iii. 4, 2). ‘ 


ASKLEPIAD FAMILIES IN GREECE. 181 


eyes and disturbed deportment which preceded the suicide of 
Ajax.! ? 

Galen appears uncertain whether Asklépius (as well as Dion- 
ysus) was originally a god, or wheth.r he was first a man and 
then became afterwards a god ;2 but Apollodérus professed to fix 
the exact date of his apotheosis. Throughout all the historical 
ages the descendants of Asklépius were numerous and widely 
diffused. ‘The many families or gentes called Asklépiads, who 
devoted themselves to the study and practice of medicine, and 
who principally dwelt near the temples of Asklévins, whither 
sick and suffering men came to obtain relief — all recognized the 
god not merely as the object of their common worship, but also 
as their actual progenitor. Like Solén, who reckoned Néleus 
and Poseidén as his ancestors, or the Milésian Hekatzus, who 
traced his origin through fifteen successive links to a god — like 
the privileged gens at Pélion in Thessaly,4 who considered the 
wise Centaur Cheirén as their progenitor, and who inherited from 
him their precious secrets respecting the medicinal herbs of which 





? Arktinus, Epice. Greece. Fragm. 2. p. 22, Diintzer. The Ilias Minor men- 
tioned the death of Machaén by Eurypylus, son of Télephus (Fragm.5. p. 
19, Diintzer). 

2 AoxAnmt6c yé Tor Kat Atévvcoc, eit’ dvdpwroe mpdtepov Horny elite Kat 
apx7Ssv Seoi (Galen, Protreptic. 9. t. 1. p. 22, Kuhn.). Pausanias considers 
him as Bed¢ 25 dpyii¢ (ii. 26, 7). In the important temple at Smyrna he 
was worsnipped as Zed¢ ’AckAnnidg (Aristidés, Or. 6. p. 64; Or. 23. p. 456, 
Dind.). 

% Apollodér. ap. Clem. Alex. Strom. i. p. 381; see Heyne, Fragment. 
Apollodér. p. 410. According to Apollodérus, the apotheosis of Héraklés 
and of /Esculapius ‘ook place at the same time, thirty-eight years after Hé- 
raklés began to reign at Argos. 

4 About Hekateus, Herodot. ii. 143; about Solén, Diogen, Laért, Vit. 
Platon. init. 

A curious fragment, preserved from the lost works of Diksarchus, tells us 
of the descendants of the Centaur Cheirén at the town of Pélion, or perhaps 
at the neighboring town of Démétrias, —it is not quite certain which, per- 
haps at both (see Dikmarch Fragment. ed. Fuhr, p. 408). Tatrnv dé rhv 
Oivauiy év Tov woditdv oide yévoc, 6 6) AéyeTat Xeipwvog axdyovov elvar* 
mapadidwot 62 Kal deixvuce matnp vid, Kai obtw¢ } Obvauic gvAdocerat, de 
obdeic GAdoc olde Tov TodiTGv* obx boov dé Todg Emiotapuévoug TA HapuaKa 
modod Toic Kauvotct BonSeiv, GAAG xpoixa. 

Plato, de Repnbl iii. 4 (p 391). ’AyiAAcde bm) TH codwraty Xeipw 
teSpaupevoc. Compare Xenophon, De Venet. c. 1 


182 HISTORY OF GRLECE, 


their neighborhood was full,— Asklépiads, even of the later 
times, numbered and specified all the intermediate links which 

separated them from their primitive divine parent. One of these 
genealogies has been preserved to us, and we may be sure that 
there were many such, as the Asklépiads were found in many 
different places.!. Among them were enrolled highly instructed 
and accomplished men, such as the great Hippocratés and the 
historian Ktésias, who prided themselves on the divine origin of 
themselves and their gens? — so much did the legendary element. 
pervade even the most philosophical and positive minds of his- 
torical Greece. Nor can there be any doubt that their means of 
medical observation must have been largely extended by their 
vicinity to a temple so much frequented by the sick, who came in 
confident hopes of divine relief, and who, whilst they offered up 
sacrifice and prayer to A®sculapius, and slept in his, temple in 
order to be favored with healing suggestions in their dreams, 
might, in case the god withheld his supernatural aid, consult his 





1 See the genealogy at length in Le Clerc, Historie de la Médecine, lib. ii. 
c. 2. p. 78, also p. 287; also Littré, Introduction aux Cuvres Completes 
d’Hippocrate, t. i. p. 85. Hippocratés was the seventeenth from Aéscula 
pius. 

Theopompus the historian went at considerable length into the pedigree 
of the Asklépiads of Kés and Knidus, tracing them up to Podaleirius and 
his first settlement at Syrnus in Karia (see Theopomp. Fragm. 111, Didot) : 
Polyanthus of Kyréné composed a special treatise tepi tig Tov "AoKAgria- 
dv yevécewe (Sextus Empiric. adv. Grammat. i. 12. p. 271); see Stephan, 
Byz. v. Kéc, and especially Aristidés, Orat. vii. Asclépiade. The Asklépiads 
were even reckoned among the ’Apynyéra: of Rhodes, jointly with the Hé- 
fakleids (Aristidés, Or. 44, ad Rhod. p. 889, Dind.). 

In the extensive sacred enclosure at Epidaurus stood the statues of Askle- 
pius and his wife Epioné (Pausan. ii. 29, 1): two daughters are coupled with 
him by Aristophanés, and he was considered especially etzac¢ (Plutus, 654) - 
Jaso, Panakeia and Hygieia are named by Aristidés. 

* Plato, Protagor. c. 6 (p. 311). ‘Immoxpaéry tov Kéov, rdv trav ’AoKAn= 
miadév ; also Pheedr. c. 121. (p. 270). About Ktésias, Galen, Opp. t. v. p. 
652, Basil.; and Bahrt, Fragm. Ktésiw, p. 20. Aristotle (see Stahr. Aristo- 
telia, i. p. 32) and Xenophén, the physician of the emperor Claudius, were 
both Asklépiads (Tacit. Annal. xii. 61). Plato, de Republ. iii. 405, calls 
them rod¢ Kopnpode 'AckAnmiadac. : 

Pausanias, a distinguished physician at Ge’a in Sicily, and contemporary 
of the philosopher Empedoklés, was also an Asklépiad: see the verses of 
Empedoklés upon him, Diogen. Laért. viii. 61. 








ASKLEPIADS AT KOS, TRIKKA, ETC. 183 


living jescendants.! The sick visitors at Kés, or Trikka, or 
Epidaurus, were numerous and constant, and the tablets usually 
hung up to record the particulars of their maladies, the remedies 
resorted to, and the cures operated by the god, formed both an 
interesting decoration of the sacred ground and an instructive 
memorial to the Asklépiads.2 

The genealogical descent of Hippocratés and the other Asklé- 
piads from the god Asklépius is not only analogous to that of 
Hekatzus and Solén from their respective ancestoral gods, but 
also to that of the Lacedeménian kings from Héraklés, upon the 
basis of which the whole supposed chronology of the ante-histo- 
rical times has been built, from Eratosthenés and Apollodérus 
down to the chronologers of the present century.3 I shall revert 
to this hereafter. 


1 Strabo, viii. p. 374; Aristophan. Vesp. 122; Plutus, 635-750; where the 
visit to the temple of Aisculapius is described in great detail, though with 
a broad farcical coloring. 

During the last illness of Alexander the Great, several of his principal 

officers slept in the temple of Serapis. in. the hope that remedies would be 
suggested to them in their dreams (Arrian, vii. 26). 
' Pausanias, in describing the various temples of Asklépius which he saw, 
announces as a fact quite notorious and well-understood, “ Here cures are 
wrought by the god” (ii. 36, 1; iii. 26, 7; vii. 27,4): see Suidas, v. ’Apio- 
tapxoc. The Orations of Aristidés, especially the 6th and 7th, Asklépius 
and the Asklépiade, are the most striking manifestations of faith and thanks 
giving towards /Esculapius, as well as attestations of his extensive working 
throughout the Grecian world; also Orat. 23 and 25, ‘IepGv Adyoc, 1 and 3; 
and Or. 45 (De Rhetorica, p. 22. Dind.), ai r’ év ’"AokAnriod rév det drarpr- 
Bévrav dayedai, ete. ‘ 

? Pausan. ii. 27, 3; 36, 1. Tatra éyyeypadypeva tort kat dvdpoy xx 
yovatkGv dvouata axecdévtwv bd tod ’AoKAnriod, mpdcete dé Kal voonua, 
6, Tt Exactog évéonce, Kat Sxwe iahn,—the cures are wrought by the god 
himself. 

% Apollodérus sxtatem Herculis pro cardine chronologiz habuit ” (Heyne, 
ad Apollodér. Fragm. p. 410). 





184 HISTORY OF GREECE 


CHAPTER X. 
JEAKUS AND HIS DESCENDANTS.— EGINA, SALAMIS, AND PHTHIA, 


Tuer memorable heroic genealogy of the A®akids establishes a 
fabulous connection between Agina, Salamis, and Phthia, which 
we can only recognize as a fact, without being able to trace its 
origin. 

£akus was the son of Zeus, born of Aigina, daughter of Asd- 
pus, whom the god had carried off and brought into the island te 
which he gave her name: she was afterwards married to Aktér, 
and had by him Meneetius, father of Patroclus. As there were 
two rivers named Asdpus, one between Phlius and Sikyén, and 
another between Thébes and Plateza— so the A°ginétan heroic 
genealogy was connected both with that of Thébes and with that 
of Phlius: and this belief led to practical consequences in the 
minds of those who accepted the legends as genuine history. For 
when the Thébans, in the 68th Olympiad, were hard-pressed in 
war by Athens, they were directed by the Delphian oracle to 
ask assistance of their next of kin: recollecting that Thébé and 
Zé gina had been sisters, common daughters of Asépus, they were 
induced to apply to the /gindtans as their next of kin, and the 
Aéginétans gave them aid, first by sending to them their common 
heroes, the AZakids, next by actual armed force.!_ Pindar dwells 
emphatically on the heroic brotherhood between Thébes, his native 
city, and AXgina.2 

Kakus was alone in A¢gina: to relieve him from this solitude, 
Zeus changed all the ants in the island into men, and thus pro- 
vided him with a numerous population, who, from their origin, 
were called Myrmidons.8 By his wife Endéis, daughter of Chei- 





* Herodot. v. 81. 2 Nem. iv. 22. Isthm. vii. 16. 

* This tale, respecting the transformation of the ants into men, is as old 
as the Hesiodic Catalogue of Women. See Diintzer, Fragm. Epice. 21. p. 
34; evidently an etymological tale from the name Myrmidones. Pausanias 
throws aside both the etymology and the details of the miracle: he says 





: 
: 
: 
: 


=e 





ee ae 


Z,AKUS AND HIS DESCENDANTS. 183 


von, /Eakus had for his sons Péleus and Telamén: by the Nereid 
Psamathé, he had Phoékus. A monstrous crime had then recently 
been committed by Pelops, in killing the Arcadian prince, Stym- 
phalus, under a simulation of friendship and hospitality: for this 
the gods had smitten all Greece with famine and barrenness. 
The oracles affirmed that nothing could relieve Greece from this 
intolerable misery except the prayers of A®akus, the most pious 
of mankind. Accordingly envoys from all quarters flocked to 
£gina, to prevail upon /Kakus to put up prayers for them: on his 
supplications the gods relented, and the suffering immediately 
ceased. The grateful Greeks established in gina the temple 
and worship of Zeus Panhellénius, one of the lasting monuments 
and institutions of the island, on the spot where /Kakus had 
offered up his prayer. The statues of the envoys who had come 
to solicit him were yet to be seen in the AXakeium, or sacred 
edifice of A®akus, in the time of Pausanias: and the Athenian 
Isokratés, in his eulogy of Evagoras, the despot of Salamis in 
Cyprus (who traced his descent through Teukrus to akus), 
enlarges upon this signal miracle, recounted and believed by 
other Greeks as well as by the A®ginétans, as a proof both of 
the great qualities and of the divine favor and patronage dis- 
played in the career of the Aiakids.! AXakus was also employed 
to aid Poseidén and Apollo in building the walls of Troy.2 
Péleus and Telamén, the sons of Aakus, contracting a jeal- 





that Zeus raised men from the earth, at the prayer of Aakus (ii. 29, 2): 
other authors retained the etymology of Myrmidons from pipunkec, but gave 
a different explanation (Kallimachus, Fragm. 114, Dintzer). Mvpyiddver 
éoaiva (Strabo, viii. p. 375). ’Eoony, 6 oixeorn¢e (Hygin. fab. 52). 

According to the Thessalian legend, Myrmidén was the son of Zeus by 
Eurymedusa, daughter of Kletor; Zeus having assumed the disguise of an 
ant (Clemens Alex. Admon. ad Gent. p. 25. Sylb.). 

+ Apollod. iii, 12, 6. Isokrat. Evagor. Encom. vol. ii. p. 278, Auger. Pau- 
san. i. 45, 13; ii. 29,6. Schol. Aristoph. Equit. 1253. 

So in the 106th Psalm, respecting the Israelites and Phinees, v. 29, “ They 
provoked the Lord to anger by their inventions, and the plague was great 
among them;” “Then stood up Phinees and prayed, and so the plague 
ceased ;” “And that was counted unto him for righteousness, among all 
posterities for evermore.” 

* Pindar, Olymp. viii. 41, with the Scholia. Didymus did not find this 
story in any other poet older than Pindar 


186 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


ousy of their bastard brother, Phékus, in consequence of his 
eminent skill in gymnastic contests, conspired to put him to death. 
Talamé6n flung his quoit at him while they were playing together, 
and Péleus despatched him by a blow with his hatchet in the 
back. ‘They then concealed the dead body in a wood, but A®akus, 
having discovered both the act and the agents, banished the 
brothers from the island.! For both of them eminent destinies 
were in store. 

While we notice the indifference to the moral quality of ac- 
tions implied in the old Hesiodic legend, when it imputes dis- 
tinctly and nakedly this proceeding to two of the most admired 
persons of the heroic world — it is not less instructive to witness 
the change of feeling which had taken place in the age of Pindar. 
That warm eulogist of the great /Eakid race hangs down his 
head with shame, and declines to recount, though ‘he is obliged 
darkly to glance at the cause which forced the pious Zakus to 
banish his sons from /Zgina. It appears that Kallimachus, if 
we may. judge by a short fragment, manifested the same repug- 
nance to mention it.2 

Telamon retired to Salamis, then ruled by Kychreus, the sou 
of Poseidén and Salamis, who had recently rescued the island 
from the plague of a terrible serpent. This animal, expelled 
from Salamis, retired to Eleusis in Attica, where it was received 
and harbored by the goddess Démétér in her sacred domicile.s 
Kychreus dying childless left his dominion to Telamén, who, mar- 





' Apollod. iii. 12,6, who relates the tale somewhat differently; but the old 
epic poem Alkmeonis gave the details (ap. Schol. Eurip. Andromach. 685) — 
"Evia piv dvtideog TeAauov tpoyoedét dicke 
TlAgfe xapn’ Inrede 68 Sods dvd yeipa raviocag 
Ativan byadnov émenAjyer peta vOTa. 

* Pindar, Nem. v. 15, with Scholia, and Kallimach. Frag. 136. Apolléni- 
us Rhodius represents the fratricide as inadvertent and unintentional (i. 92); 
one instance amongst many of the tendency to soften down and make 
the ancient tales. 

Pindar, however, seems to forget this incident when he special in other 
places of the general character of Péleus (Olymp. ii. 75-86. Isthm: vii. 40). 

% Apollod. iii. 12, 7. Euphorién, Fragm. 5, Diintzer, p. 43, Epice. Gree. 
There may have been a tutelary serpent in the temple at Eleusis, as there was 
in that of Athéné Polias at Athens (Herodot: viii. 41. Photius, v. Olxodpov 
igtv. Aristophan. Lysistr. 759, with the Schol.). ‘ 


PELLUS AND TELAMON. 187 


rying Periboea, daughter of Alkathoos, and grand-daughter of 
Pelops, had for his son the celebrated Ajax. Telamén took 
part both in the chase of the Kalydonian boar and in the Argo- 
nautic expedition: he was also the intimate friend and companion 
of Héraklés, whom he accompanied in his enterprise against the 
Amazons, and in the attack made with only six ships upon Lao- 
medon, king of Troy. This last enterprise having proved com- 
pletely successful, Telamén was rewarded by Héraklés with the 
possession of the daughter of Laomedén, Hésioné — who bore to 
him Teukros, the most. distinguished archer amidst the host. of 
Agamennén, and the founder of Salamis in Cyprus.! 

Péleus went to Phthia, where he married the daughter of 
Eurytién, son of Aktor, and received from him the third part of 
his dominions.. Taking part in the Kalydonian boar-hunt, he 
unintentionally killed his father-in-law Eurytion, and was obliged 
to flee to Idlkos, where he received purification from Akastus, 
son of Pelias: the danger to which he became exposed by the 
calumnious accusations of the enamoured wife of Akastus has 
already been touched upon in a previous section. Péleus also 
was among the Argonauts; the most memorable event in his life 
however was his marriage with the sea-goddess Thetis. Zeus 
‘and Poseidén had both conceived a violent passion for Thetis. 
But the former, having been forewarned by Prométheus that 
Thetis was destined to give birth to a son more powerful than 
his father, compelled her, much against her own will, to marry 
Péleus; who, instructed by the intimations of the wise Cheirén, 
was enabled to seize her on the coast called Sépias in the south- 
ern region of Thessaly. She changed her form several times, 
but Péleus held her fast until she resumed her original appear- 
ance, and she was then no longer able to resist. All the gods 
were present, and brought splendid gifts to these memorable nup- 
tials: Apollo sang with his harp, Poseidén gave to Péleus the 
immortal horses Xanthus and Balius, and Cheiroén presented a 


-_ 





' Appollod. iii. 12, 7. Hesiod. ap. Strab. ix. p. 393. 

The libation and prayer of Héraklés, prior to the birth of Ajax, and his 
fixing the name of the yet unborn child, from an eagle (aierd¢) which ap- 
peared in response to his words, was detailed in the Hesiodic Eoia, and is 
eclebrated by Pindar (Isthm v. 30-54). See also the Scholia. 


188 HISTORY OF GREECE. | 


formidable spear, cut from an ash-tree on Mount Pélion. We 
shall have reason hereafter to recognize the value of both these 
gifts in the exploits of Achilles.! 

The prominent part assigned to Thetis in the Iliad is well 
known, and the post-Homeric poets of the Legend of Troy in- 
troduced her as actively concurring first to promote the glory, 
finally to bewail the death of her distinguished son. Péleus, 
haying survived both his son Achilles and his grandson Neopto- 
lemus, is ultimately directed to place himself on the very spot 
where he had originally seized Thetis, and thither the goddess 
comes herself to fetch him away, in order that he may exchange 
the desertion and decrepitude of age for a life of immortality 
along with the Néreids. The spot was indicated to Xerxés when 
he marched into Greece by the Ionians who accompanied him, 
and his magi offered solemn sacrifices to her as well as to the 
other Néreids, as the presiding goddesses and mistresses of the 
roast.4 

Neoptolemus or Pyrrhus, the son of Achilles, too young to 
engage in the commencement of the siege of Troy, comes on the 
stage after the death of his father as the indispensable and pro- 
minent agent in the final capture of the city. He returns victor 
from Troy, not to Phthia, but to Epirus, bringing with him the 
captive Andromaché, widow of Hector, by whom Molossus is 





1 Appollodér. iii. 13, 5. Homer, Iliad, xviii, 434; xxiv. 62. Pindar, 
Nem. iv. 50-68; Isthm. vii. 27-50. Herodot. vii. 192. Catullus, Carm. 64. 
Epithal. Pel. et Thetidos, with the prefatory remarks of Dering. 

The nuptials of Péleus and Thetis were much celebrated in the Hesiodie 
Catalogue, or perhaps in the Eoiai (Diintzer, Epic. Grac. Frag. 36. p. 39), 
and Agimius—see Schol. ad Apollon. Rhod. iv. 869— where there is a 
curious attempt of Staphylus to rationalize the marriage of Péleus and 
Thetis. 

There was a town, seemingly near Pharsalus in Thessaly, called Thetide 
ium. Thetis is said to have been carried by Péleus to both these places: 
probably it grew up round a temple and sanctuary of this goddess (Pherekyd. 
Frag. 16, Didot; Hellank. ap. Steph. Byz. Qecrvdciov). 

? See the arguments of the lost poems, the Cypria and the Aithiopis, as 
given by Proclus, in Dantzer, Fragm. Epic. Gr. p. 11-16; also Schol. ad 
Tliad. xvi. 140; and the extract from the lost Yuyoorazia of Aschylus, ap. 
Plato. de Republic. ii. ¢. 21 (p. 382, St.). ‘ 

* Eurip. Androm. 1242-1260; Pindar, Olymp. ii. 86. 

Herodot. vii. 198, 


a 


OE | 


ACHILLES AND AJAX. 189 


born to him. He himself perishes in the full vigor of life at 
Delphi by the machinations of Orestés, son of Agamemnon. But 
his son Molossus — like Fleance, the son of Banquo, in Macbeth 
—becomes the father of the powerful race of Molossian kings, 
who played so conspicuous a part during the declining vigor of 
the Grecian cities, and to whom the title and parentage of Avakids 
was a source of peculiar pride, identifying them by community 
of heroic origin with genuine and undisputed Hellénes.! 

The glories of Ajax, the second grandson of A®akus, before 
Troy, are surpassed only by those of Achilles. He perishes by 
his own hand, the victim of an insupportable feeling of humilia- 
tion, because a less worthy claimant is allowed to carry off from 
him the arms of the departed Achilles. His son Phileus receives 
the citizenship of Athens, and the gens or déme called Philaidz 
traced up*to him its name and its origin: moreover the distin 
guished Athenians, Militiadés and Thucydidés, were regarded as 
members of this heroic progeny.? 

Teukrus eseaped from the perils of the siege of Troy as well 
as from those of thé voyage homeward, and reached Salamis in 
safety. But his father Telamon, indignant at his having return- 
ed without Ajax, refused to receive him, and compelled him to 


expatriate. He conducted his followers to Cyprus, where he 


founded the city of Salamis: his descendant Evagoras was re- 
cognized as a Teukrid and as an akid even in the time of 
Isokratés.3 





? Plutarch, Pyrrh. 1; Justin, xi. 3; Eurip. Androm. 1253; Arrian, Exp. 
Alexand. i. 11. 

? Pherekydés and Hellanikus ap. Marcellin. Vit. Thucydid. init.; Pausan. 
ii. 29,4; Plutarch, Sol6én, 10. According to Apollodérus, however, Phere 
kydés said that Telamén was only the friend of Péleus, not his brother, — 
not the son of AZakus (iii. 12,7): this seems an inconsistency. ‘There was 
however a warm dispute between the Athenians and the Megarians respect- 
ing the title to the hero Ajax, who was claimed by both (see Pausan. i. 42, 
4; Plutarch, /. c.): the Megarians accused Peisistratus of having interpolated 
a line into the Catalogue in the Iliad (Strabo, ix. p. 394). 

* Herodot. vii, 90; Isokrat. Enc. Evag. ut sup.; Sophokl. Ajax, 984-995; 
Vellei. Patercul. i.1; Aéschyl. Pers. 891, and Schol. The return from Troy 
of Tenkrus, his banishment by Telam6n, and his settlement in Cyprus, form- 
ed the subject of the Tedxpog of Sophoklés, and of a tragedy under a similaa 


190 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Such was the splendid heroic genealogy of the Aakids, —a 
family renowned for military excellence. The A®akeion at Egi- 
na, in which prayer and sacrifice were offered to A°akus, remain- 
ed in undiminished dignity down to the time of Pausanias.! This 
genealogy connects together various eminent gentes in Achaia 
Phthidtis, in A®gina, in Salamis, in Cyprus, and amongst the 
Epirotic Molossians. Whether we are entitled to infer from it 
that the island of A®gina was originally peopled by Myrmidones 
from Achaia Phthidtis, as O. Miller imagines,? I will not pretend 
to affirm. ‘These mythical pedigrees seem to unite together spe 
cial clans or gentes, rather than the bulk of any community — 
just as we know that the Athenians generally had no part in the 
Z£akid genealogy, though certain particular Athenian families laid 
claim to it. The intimate friendship between Achilles and the 
Opuntian hero Patroclus — and the community of narhe and fre- 
quent conjunction between the Locrian Ajax, son of Oileus, and 
Ajax, son of Telamén — connect the Zakids with Opus and the 
Opuntian Locrians, in a manner which we have no farther means 
of explaining. Pindar too represents Mencetius, father of Patro- 
clus, as son of Aktér and A®gina, and therefore maternal brother 
of Aakus.3 





title by Pacuvius (Cicero de Orat. i. 58; ii. 46); Sophokl. Ajax, 892; Pacuyii 
Li ‘es Teucr. 15.— 
“Te eng, nec recipio, natum abdico, 
Facesse.” : 
The legend of Teukros was connected in Attic archeology with the seraiane 
functions and formalities of the judicature, év dpearroi (Pamsan. i, 28, 12; 
ii. 29, 7). 
1 Hesiod, Fragm. Diintz, Eoiai, 55, y. 43.— 
"AAKiy pév yap Edwxev ’OAburto¢ Alaxidacot, 
Notv & ’Auvdaovidate, x20bTov & Exop’ "Arpeidyor. 
Polyb. v. 2.— 
Alakidac, roAéup Kexyapnorac irk datri. 
? See his Mginetica, p. 14, his earliest work. 


5 Pindar, Olymp. ix. 74. The hero Ajax, son of Oileus, was especially 


worshipped at Ojyus; solemn festivals and games were celebrated in his 
honor. b 


ATTIC LEGENDS AND GENEALOGIES 191 


CHAPTER XI. 
ATTIC LEGENDS AND GENEALOGIES. 


Tue most ancient name in Attic archeology, as far as our 
means of information reach, is that of Erechtheus, who is men- 
tioned both in the Catalogue of the Iliad and in a brief allusion 
of the Odyssey. Born of the Earth, he is brought up by the 
goddess Athéné, adopted by her as her ward, and installed in her 
temple at Athens, where the Athenians offer to him annual sac- 
rifices. ‘The Athenians are styled in the Iliad, “the people of 
Erechtheus.”! ‘This is the most ancient testimony concerning 
Erechtheus, exhibiting him as a divine or heroic, certainly a su- 
perhuman person, and identifying him with the primitive ger- 
mination (if I may use a term, the Grecian equivalent of which 
would have pleased an Athenian ear) of Attic man. And he 
was recognized in this same character, even at the close of the 
fourth century before the Christian «ra, by the Butada, one of 
the most ancient and important Gentes at Athens, who boasted 
of him as their original ancestor: the genealogy of the great 
Athenian orator Lykurgus, a member of this family, drawn up 
by his son Abroén, and painted on a public tablet in the Erechthe- 
ion, contained as its first and highest name, Erechtheus, son of 
Héphestos and the Earth. In the Erechtheion, Erechtheus was 
worshipped conjointly with Athéné: he was identified with the 
_ god Poseidén, and bore the denomination of Pozeidén Erech- 





' Tliad, ii. 546. Odyss. vii. 81.— 


Oi & dp’ ’ASpvag siyov......... 
Ajjpov ’Epex Soc peyadqropoc, dv ror’ *AVivy 
Opéwe, Arde Suyarnp, téxe d? Ceidwpoc “Apovpa, 
Kad & lv ’Adqvyao’ eicev é@ évi riove yn@, 
"Evdade uty tadpotor kal apveroi¢ iAdovrat 
Kotpor ’Adnvaiwv, reorreAAouévov éviavrav. 


192 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


theus: one of the family of the Butadz, chosen among themselves 
by lot, enjoyed the privilege and performed the functions of his 
hereditary priest.! Herodotus also assigns the same earth-born 
origin to Erechtheus :? but Pindar, the old poem called the Da- 
nais, Euripidés and Apollodérus —all name Erichthonius, son of 
Héphestos and the Earth, as the being who was thus adopted 
and made the temple-companion of Athéné, while Apollodérus in 
another place identifies Erichthonius with Poseidén.3 The Ho- 
meric scholiast treated Erechtheus and Erichthonius as the same 
person under two names :4 and since, in regard to such mythical 
persons, there exists no other test of identity of the subject ex- 
cept perfect similarity of the attributes, this seems the reasonable 
conclusion. 

We may presume, from the testimony of Homer, that the first 
and oldest conception of Athens and its sacred acropolis places it 
under the special protection, and represents it as the settlement 
and favorite abode of Athéné, jointly with Poseidén; the latter 
being the inferior, though the chosen companion of the former, 
and therefore exchanging his divine appellation for the cog- 
nomen of Erechtheus. But the country called. Attica, which, 
during the historical ages, forms one social and political aggregate 
with Athens, was originally distributed into many independent 





1 See the Life of Lykufgus, in Plutarch’s (I call it by that name, as it is 
always printed with his works) Lives of the Ten Orators, tom. iy. p. 382- 
384, Wytt. Kariyov 6? 7d yévog dxéd TotTwv Kat ’EpexSéwc tod Tie Kar 
"Hoaiorov..... ‘ws..kal éoTlvy aith 7 KaTaywy? Tod yévove Tov lepacapévav 
tod Ilocedévoc, ete. “Og tiv lepwobvyv Ioceddvog "Epexdéag elxeé (pp. 
882, 383). Erechtheus Idpedpo¢ of Athéné —Aristidés, Panathenaic. p. 
184, with the Scholia of Frommel. 

Butés, the eponymus of the Butada, is the first priest of Poseid6n rich 
thonius: Apollod. iii. 15,1. So Kallais (Xenoph. Sympos. viii. 40), leped< 
Seay tov an’ "EpeyO bc. 

* Herodot. viii. 55. 

* Harpokration, vy. AtroySav. 'O dé Ilivdapoc kai 6 rv Aavaida memounxdg 
gaciv, ’"EpixSoviov && ‘Hdaiorov nat Tij¢ dav#vat. Euripidés, Ion. 21. 
Apollod. iii. 14, 6; 15,1. Compare Plato, Timeus, c. 6. 

* Schol. ad Iliad. ii. 546, where he cites also Kallimachus for the story of 
Erichthonius. Etymologicon Magn. ‘Epeydeic. Plato (Kritias, c. 4) em- 
ploys vague and general language to describe the agency of Héphexstos and 
Athéné, which the old fable in Apollodérus (iii. 14, 6) details in coarser 
terms. See Ovid, Metam. ii. 757. 


LEGENDS OF THE ATTIC DEMES AND GENTES. 193 


démes or cantons, and included, besides, various religious clans 
or hereditary sects (if the expression may be permitted); that 
is, a multitude of persons not necessarily living together in the 
same locality, but bound together by an hereditary communion of 
sacred rites, and claiming privileges, as well as performing obli- 
gations, founded upon the traditional authority of divine persons 
for whom they had a common veneration. Even down to the 
beginning of the Peloponnésian war, the demots of the various 
Attic démes, though long since embodied in the larger political 
union of Attica, and having no wish for separation, still retained 
the recollection of their original political autonomy. They lived 
in their own separate localities, resorted habitually to their own 
temples, and visited Athens only occasionally for private or po- 
litical business, or for the great public festivals. Each of these 
aggregates, political as well as religious; had its own eponymous 
god or hero, with a genealogy more or less extended, and a train 
of mythical incidents more or less copious, attached to his name, 
according to the fancy of the local exegetes and poets. The 
eponymous heroes Marathon, Dekelus, Kolonus, or Phlius, had 
’ each their own title to worship, and their own position as themes 
of legendary narrative, independent of Erechtheus, or Poseidén, 
or Athéné, the patrons of the acropolis common to all of them, - 
- Butneither the archeology of Attica, nor that of its various 
component fractions, was much dwelt upon by the ancient epic 
poets of Greece. Théseus is noticed both in the Iliad and 
Odyssey as haying carried off from Kréte Ariadné, the daugh- 
ter of Minos— thus commencing that connection between the 
Krétan and Athenian legends which we afterwards find so large- 
ly amplified — and the sons of Théseus take part in the Trojan 
war.! The chief collectors and narrators of the Attic mythes 
were, the prose logographers, authors of the many compositions 
called Atthides, or works on Attic archeology. These writers — 
Hellanikus, the contemporary of Herodotus, is the earliest com- 
poser of an Atthis expressly named, though Pherekydés also 
touched upon the Attic fables—these writers, I say, interwove 
into one chronological series the legends which either greatly oc- 
cupied their own fancy, or commanded the most general reverence 





' ZEthra, mother of Théseus, is also mentioned (Homer, Iliad, iii. 144). 
VOL. I. 9 130¢. 


194 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


among their countrymen. In this way the religious and politica 
legends of Eleusis, a town originally independent of Athens, but 
incorporated with it before the historical age, were worked into 
one continuous sequence along with those of the Erechtheids. 
In this way, Kekrops, the eponymous hero of the portion of 
Attica called Kekropia, came to be placed in the mythical chro- 
nology at a higher point even than the primitive god or here 
Erechtheus. 

Ogygés is said to have reigned in Attica! 1020 years before the 
first Olympiad, or 1796 years B. c. In his time happened the 
deluge of Deukalién, which destroyed most of the inhabitants of 
the country: after along interval, Kekrops, an indigenous person, 
half man and half serpent, is given to us by Apollodérus as the 
first king of the country: he bestowed upon the land, which had 
before been called Acté, the name of Kekropia. In his day there 
ensued a dispute between Athéné and Poseidén respecting the 
possession of the acropolis at Athens, which each of them coy- 
eted. First, Poseidén struck the rock with his trident, and 
produced the well of salt water which existed in it, called the 
Erechthéis: next came Athéné, who planted the sacred olive-tree 
ever afterwards seen and venerated in the portion of Erech- 
theion called the cell of Pandrosus. ‘The twelve gods decided the 
dispute; and Kekrops having testified before them that Athéné 
had rendered this inestimable service, they adjudged the spot to 
her in preference to Poseidén. Both the ancient olive-tree and 
the well produced by Poseidén were seen on the acropolis, in the 
temple consecrated jointly to Athéné and Erechtheus, throughout 
the historical ages. Poseidén, as a mark of his wrath for the 





1 Hellanikus, Fragm. 62; Philochor. Fragm. 8, ap. Euseb. Prasp. Evang; 
x. 10. p. 489. Larcher (Chronologie d’Hérodote, ch. ix. s. 1. p. 278) treats 
both the historical personality and the date of Ogygés as perfectly well au- 
thenticated. 

It is not probable that Philochorus should have given any calculation of 
time having reference to Olympiads; and hardly conceivable that Hellani- 
kus should have done’so. Justin Martyr quotes Hellanikus and Philochorus 
as having mentioned Moses, — d¢ o¢6dpa dpyaiov kat ra%atod rdv "lovdaiuy 
dpxovtoc Mwiicéwe yéuvnvtat — which is still more incredible even. than the 
assertion of Eusebius about their having fixed the date of Ogyges ky Olym- 
piads (see Philochor. Fragm. 9). 


ATHENE AND POSEIDON. 19% 


preference given to Athéné, inundated the Thriasian plain with 
water.! 

During the reign of Kekrops, Attica was laid saci by Karian 
pirates on the coast, and by invasions of the Adnian inhabitants 
from Bedtia. Kekrops distributed the inhabitants of Attica into 
twelve local sections — Kekropia, Tetrapolis, Epakria, Dekeleia, 
Eleusis, Aphidna, Thorikus, Braurén, Kythérus, Sphéttus, Ké- 
phisius, Phalerus. Wishing to ascertain the number of inhabitants, 
he commanded each man to cast a single stone into a general heap: 
the number of stones was counted, and it was found that there 
were twenty thousand.? 

Kekrops married the daughter of Aktzus, who (according to 
Pausanias’s version) had been king of the country before him, 
and had called it by the name of Aktzea3 By her he had three 
daughters, Aglaurus, Ersé and Pandrosus, and a son, Erysichthon. 
Kekrops is called by Pausanias contemporary of the Arcadian 
Lykaén, and is favorably contrasted with that savage prince in re- 
spect of his piety and humanity. Though he has been often desig- 
nated in modern histories as an immigrant from Egypt into Attica, 





' Apollod. iii. 14,1; Herodot. viii. 55; Ovid. Metam. vi. 72.. The story 
current among the Athenians represented Kekrops as the judge of this con- 
troversy (Xenoph. Memor. iii. 5, 10). 

The impressions of the trident of Poseidén were still shown upon the rock 
in the time of Pausanias (Pausan. i. 26, 4). For the sanctity of the ancient 
olive-tree, see the narrative of Herodotus (/. c.), relating what happened to it 
when Xerxés occupied the acropolis. As this tale seems to have attached it- 
self specially to the local peculiarities of the Erechtheium, the part which Po- 
seiddn plays in it is somewhat mean: that god appears to greater advantage 
in the neighborhood of the ‘Imzorij¢ KoAwvdc, as described in the beautiful 
Chorus of Sophoklés (C&dip. Colon. 690-712). 

A curious rationalization of the monstrous form ascribed to Kekrops 
(dcdv}¢) in Plutarch (Sera Num. Vindict. p. 551). 

® Philochor. ap. Strabo. ix. p. 397. 

% The Parian chronological marble designates Aktseus as an autochthonous 
person. Marmor Parium, Epoch. 3.. Pausan. i. 2,5. Philochorus treated 
Aktazus as a fictitious name (Fragm. 8, ut sup.). 

4 Pausan. viii. 2.2. The three daughters of Kekrops were not unnoticed 
in the mythes (Ovid, Metam.ii. 739) : the tale of Kephalus, son of Hersé by 
Hermés, who was stolen away by the goddess Eds or Hémera in consequence 
of his surpassing: beauty, was told in more than one of the Hesiodic poems 
{Pausan. i. 3,1; Hesiod. Theog. 986). See also Eurip. Ion. 269. 


196 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


yet the far greater number of ancient authorities Ree hips 
as indigenous or earth-born.! 

Erysichth6n died without issue, and Kranaus succeeded hist, — 
another autochthonous person and another eponymus, —for the 
name Kranai was an old denomination of the inhabitants of At- 
tica.2 Kranaus was dethroned by Amphiktyén, by some called 
an autochthonous man; by others, a son of Deukalién: Amphik- 
ty6n in his turn was expelled by Erichthonius, son of Héphzestos 
and the Earth, — the same person apparently as Erechtheus, but 
inserted by Apollodérus at this point of the series. Erichthonius, 
the pupil and favored companion of Athéné, placed in the acropo- 
lis the original Palladium or wooden statue of that goddess, said 
to have dropped from heaven : he was moreover the first to cele- 
brate the festival of the Panathenwa. He married the nymph 
Pasithea, and had for his son and successor Pandién.2 Erichtho- 


nius was the first person who taught the art of breaking in horses 


+o the yoke, and who drove a chariot and four.4 

In the time of Pandién, who succeeded to Erichthonius, Dio- 
nysus and Démétér both came into Attica: the latter was received 
by Keleos at Eleusis.6 Pandién married the nymph Zeuxippé, 
and had twin sons, Erechtheus and Butés, and two daughters, 
Prokné and Philoméla. The two latter are the subjects of a memo- 
rable and well-known legend. Pandién having received aid in 
repelling the Thébans from Téreus, king of Thrace, gave him his 
daughter Prokné in marriage, by whom he had a son, Itys. The 
beautiful Philoméla, going to visit her sister, inspired the barbarous 
Thracian with an irresistible passion: he violated her person, con- 
fined her in a distant pastoral hut, and pretended that she was dead, 
cutting out her tongue to prevent her from revealing the truth. Af- 


ter a long interval, Philoméla found means to acquaint her sister of ~ 


the cruel deed which had been perpetrated ; she wove into a gar- 
ment words describing her melancholy condition, and despatched it 





? Jul. Africanus also (ap. Euseb. x. 9: p. 486-488) calls Kekrops ynyevie 
and abroydov. 

2 Herod. viii. 44. Kpavaa? 'AYjvat, Pindar. 

3 Apollod. iii. 14." Pausan. i. 26, 7. 4 Virgil, Georgic iii. 114. 

® The mythe of the visit of Démétér to Eleusis, on which occasion she 
youchsafed to teach her holy rites to the leading Eleusinians, is more ra 
touched upon in a previous chapter (see ante, p. 50). 


=e 


PANDION.—PROKNE. — TEREUS. 197 


by a trusty messenger. Prokné, overwhelmed with sorrow and an- 
ger, took advantage of the free egress enjoyed by women during the 
Bacchanalian festival to go and release her sister: the two sis- 
ters then revenged themselves upon Téreus by killing the boy Itys, 
and serving him up for his father to eat: after the meal had been 
finished, the horrid truth was revealed to him. Téreus snatched a 
hatchet to put Prokné to death: she fled, along with Philoméla, 
and all the three were changed into birds — Prokné became a swal- 
low, Philoméla a nightingale, and Téreus an hoopoe.' This tale, 
so popular with the poets, and so illustrative of the general char- 
acter of Grecian legend, is not less remarkable in another point of 
view —that the great historian Thucydidés seems to allude to it 
as an historical fact,? not however directly mentioning the final 
metamorphosis. 

After the death of Pandién, Erechtheus succeeded to the hinge 
dom, and his brother, Butés, became priest of Poseidén Erich- 
thonius, a function which his descendants ever afterwards exer- 
cised, the Butade or Eteobutade. Erechtheus seems to appear 
in three characters in the fabulous history of Athens —as a god, 





1 Apollod. iii. 14, 8; Aésch. Supplic. 61; Soph. Elektr. 107; Ovid, Meta- 
morph. vi. 425-670. Hyginus gives the fable with some additional circum 
stances, fab. 45. Antoninus Liberalis (Narr.11), or Boeus, from whom he 
copies, has composed a new narrative by combining together the names of 
Pandareos and Aédon, as given in the Odyssey, xix. 523, and the adven- 
tures of the old Attic fable. The hoopoe still continued the habit of chasing 
the nightingale ; it was to the Athenians a present fact. See Schol. Aristoph. 
Aves, 212. 

? Thucyd. ii. 29. He makes express mention of the nightingale in con- 
nection with the story, though not of the metamorphosis. See below, chap. 
xvi. p.544, note 2. So also does Pausanias mention and reason upon it as a 
real incident: he founds upon it several moral reflections (i. 5,4; x. 4, 5): 
the author of the Aéyoc *Exra¢gioc, ascribed to Demosthenés, treats it in the 
same manner, as a fact ennobling the tribe Pandionis, of which Pandién was 
the eponymus. The same author, in touching upon Kekrops, the eponymus 
of the Kekropis tribe, cannot believe literally the story of his being half man 
and half serpent: he rationalizes it by saying that Kekrops was so called be- 
cause in wisdom he was like a man, in strength like a serpent (Demosth. 
p- 1397, 1398, Reiske). Hesiod glances at the fable (Opp. Di. 566), dp9poyéq 
Tavdiovic Gpro xeAdov ; see also Mlian, V. H. xii. 20. The subject was 
handled by Sophoklés in his lost Téreus. 


198 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Poseidén Erechtheus! —as a hero, Erechtheus, son of the Earth 
—and now, as a king, son of Pandién: so much did the ideas of 
divine and human rule become confounded and blended together 
in the imagination of the Greeks in reviewing their early times. 

The daughters of Erechtheus were not less celebrated in Athe- 
nian legend than those of Pandién. Prokris, one of them, is 
among the heroines seen by Odysseus in Hadés: she became the 
wife of Kephalus, son of Deionés, and lived in the Attic déme of 
Thorikus. Kephalus tried her fidelity by pretending that he 
was going away for a long period; but shortly returned, disguis- 
ing his person and bringing with him a splendid necklace. He 
presented himself to Prokris without being recognized, and suc- 
ceeded in triumphing over her chastity. Having accomplished 
this object, he revealed to her his true character: she earnestly 
besought his forgiveness, and prevailed upon him to grant it. 
Nevertheless he became shortly afterwards the unintentional au- 
thor of her death: for he was fond of hunting, and staid out a 
long time on his excursions, so that Prokris suspected him of 
visiting some rival. She determined to watch him by concealing 
herself in a thicket near the place of his midday repose; and 
when Kephalus implored the presence of Nephelé (a cloud) to 
protect him from the sun’s rays, she suddenly started from her 
hiding-place: Kephalus, thus disturbed, cast his hunting-spear 
unknowingly into the thicket and slew his wife. Erechtheus in- 
terred her with great magnificence, and Kephalus was tried for 
the act before the court of Areopagus, which condemned him to 
exile.? 

Kreiisa, another daughter of Erechtheus, seduced by Apollo, 
becomes the mother of Ié6n, whom she exposes immediately after 
his birth in the cave north of the acropolis, concealing the fact 
from every one. Apollo prevails upon Hermés to convey the 
new-born child to Delphi, where he is brought up as a servant of 
the temple, without knowing his parents. Kreiisa marries Xuthus, 
son of /£olus, but continuing childless, she goes with Xuthus to 





? Poseidon is sometimes spoken of under the name of Erechtheus simply 
(Lycophrén, 158). See Hesychius, v. EpexySete. 4 

* Pherekydés, Fragm. 77, Didot; ap. Schol. ad Odyss. xi. 320; Hellanikus 
Fr. 82; ap. Schol. Eurip. Orest. 1648. Apollodéras (iii 15,1) gives the 
story differently. 


ATTIC LEGENDS AND GENEALOGIES 199 


the Delphian oracle to inquire for a remedy. The god presents 
to them dn, and desires them to adopt him as their son: their 
son Achzus is afterwards born to them, and Jén and Achzus 
become the eponyms of the I6nians and Achzans.! 

Oreithyia, the third daughter of Erechtheus, was stolen away 
by the god Boreas while amusing herself on the banks of the 
Ilissus, and carried to his residence in Thrace. The two sons of 
this marriage, Zétés and Kalais, were born with wings: they 
took part in the Argonautic expedition, and engaged in the pur- 
suit of the Harpies: they were slain at Ténos by Héraklés, 
Kleopatra, the daughter of Boreas and Oreithyia, was married to 
-Phineus, and had two sons, Plexippus and Pandién; but Phineus 
afterwards espoused a second wife, Idza, the daughter of Darda- 
nus, who, detesting the two sons of the former bed, accused them 
falsely of attempting her chastity, and persuaded Phineus in his 
wrath to put out the eyes of both. For this cruel proceeding he 
‘was punished by the Argonauts in the course of their voyage.” 

On more than one occasion the Athenians derived, or at least 
believed themselves to have derived, important benefits from this 
marriage of Boreas with the daughter of their primeval hero: 
one inestimable service, rendered at a juncture highly critical for 





? Upon this story of I6n is founded the tragedy of Euripidés which bears 
that name. I conceive many of the points of that tragedy to be of the in- 
vention of Euripidés himself: but to represent I6n as son of Apollo, not of 
Xuthus, seems a genuine Attic legend. Respecting this drama, see O. Miil- 
ler, Hist. of Dorians, ii. 2. 13-15. I doubt however the distinction which he 
draws between the Ionians and the other population of Attica. 

? Apollod6r. iii. 15,2; Plato, Phedr. c.3; Sophok. Antig. 984; also the 
copious Scholion on Apollon. Rhod. i. 212. 

The tale of Phineus is told very differently in the Argonautic expedition 
as given by Apollénius Rhodius, ii. 180. From Sophoklés we learn that 
this was the Attic version. 

The two winged sons of Boreas and their chase of the Harpies were no- 
ticed in the Hesiodic Catalogue (see Schol. Apollén. Rhod. ii. 296). But 
whether the Attic legend of Oreithyia was recognized in the Hesiodic poems 
seems not certain. 

Both Zschylus and Sophoklés composed dramas on the subject of Orei- 
thyia (Longin. de Sublimit. ¢. 3), _“ Orithyia Atheniensis, filia Terrigene, 
et a Borea in Thraciam rapta.” (Servius ad Virg. Aneid. xii. 83).. Ter- 
rigenz is the yyyevac "EpeySetc. Philochorus (Fragm. 30) rationalized the 
story, and said that it alluded to the effects of a violent wind. 


200 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Grecian independence, deserves to be specified.! At the tir 6 of 
the invasion of Greece by Xerxés, the Grecian fleet was assem 
bled at Chalcis and Artemision in Eubcea, awaiting the approach 
of the Persian force, so overwhelming in its numbers as well by 
sea as on land. The Persian fleet had reached the coast of Mag- 
nésia and the south-eastern corner of Thessaly without any ma- 
terial damage, when the Athenians were instructed by an oracle 
“to invoke the aid of their son-in-law.” Understanding the ad- 
vice to point to Boreas, they supplicated his aid and that of Orei- 
thyia, most earnestly, as well by prayer as’ by sacrifice,? and the 
event corresponded to their wishes. A furious north-easterly wind 
immediately arose, and continued for three days to afflict the Per- 
sian fleet as it lay on an unprotected coast: the number of ships 
driven ashore, both vessels of war and of provision, was immense, 
and the injury done to the armament was never thoroughly re- 
paired. Such was the powerful succor which the Athenians de- 
rived, at a time of their utmost need, from their son-in-law Boreas ; 

and their gratitude was shown by consecrating to him a new tem- 
ple on the banks of the Llissus. 

The three remaining daughters of Erechtheus —he had six in 
alls — were in Athenian legend yet more venerated than their 
sisters, on account of having voluntarily devoted themselves to 
death for the safety of their country. Eumolpus of Eleusis was 
the son of Poseidén and the eponymous hero of the sacred gens 
called the Eumolpids, in whom the principal functions, appertain- 
ing to the mysterious rites of Démétér at Eleusis, were vested 
by hereditary privilege: he made war upon Erechtheus and the 





1 Herodot. vii. 189. Ol 0’ dv ’AVnvaioi ods Aéyovor BonSjoavra Tov Bopay 
mporepov, kal TéTe éxeiva Karepydcacdat: Kai ipdy ameAdovres Bopéw idpd. 
cavto rapa torapudy “lAocov 

2 Herodot. lc, ’Adnvaios tov Bopiy éx Becepoaion éxexadéoarto, éAdov- 
Toc oft dAAov xpyornpiov, roy yauBpdv éxixovpov Ka2écacdat. Bopig dé, 
Kata Tov “EAAQvor Adyov exer yovaixa *Arrixyjy, "Qpevdvinv rhv ’Epexdjoe. 
Kara df rd Kjdo¢ TotTo, of "AYnvaiot, ovuBadAedpuevot ogt Tov Bopyy yauBpor 
elvat, ete. 

3 Suidas and Photius, vy. Il@p%evor: Protogeneia and Pandéra are given 
as the names of two of them. The sacrifice of Pandéra, in the Iambi of 
Hippénax (Hipponact. Fragm. xxi. Welck. ap. Athen. ix. p. 370), seems te 
allude to this daughter of Erechtheus, 


LEGENDS AND GENEALOGIES OF ELEUSIS. 901 


Athenians, with the aid of a body of Thracian allies; indeed it 
appears that the legends of Athens, originally foreign and un- 
friendly to those of Eleusis, represented him as haying been him- 
self a Thracian born and an immigrant into Attica.! Respecting 
Eumolpus however and his parentage, the discrepancies much 
exceed even the measure of license usual in the legendary ge 
nealogies, and some critics, both ancient and modern, have sought 
to reconcile these contradictions by the usual stratagem of sup- 
posing two or three different persons of the same name. Even 
Pausanias, so familiar with this class of unsworn witnesses, com- 
plains of the want of native Eleusinian genealogists,? and of the 
extreme license of fiction in which other authors had indulged. 
In the Homeric Hymn to Démétér, the most ancient testimony 
before us, — composed, to all appearance, earlier than the com- 
plete incorporation of Eleusis with Athens, — Eumolpus appears 
(to repeat briefly what has been stated in a previous chapter) as 
one of the native chiefs or princes of Eleusis, along with Tripto- 





1 Apollodér. iii. 15,3; Thucyd. ii. 15; Iskoratés (Panegyr, t. i. p. 206; 
Panathenaic. t. ii. p. 560, Auger), Lykurgus, cont. Leocrat. p. 201, Reiske , 
Pausan. i, 38, 3; Euripid. Erechth. Fragm. The Schol. ad. Soph. Cid. Col, 
1048 gives valuable citations from Ister, Akestodorus and Androtién: we 
see that the inquirers of antiquity found it difficult to explain how the Eumol- 
pids could have acquired their ascendant privileges in the management of 
the Eleusinia, seeing that Eumolpus himself was a foreigner.— Zyreirat, ti 
dnrore ol EipoAridat rov redetov éapyovet, Sévor dvtec. Thucydidés does 
not call Eumolpus a Thracian: Strabo’s language is very large and vague 
(vii. p. 821): Iskoratés says that he assailed Athens in order to vindicate 
the rights of his father Poseidén to the sovereign patronage of the city. Hy- 
ginus copies this (fab. 46). ee te 

2 Pausan. i. 38.3. ’EAevoiviol te dpyaiot, ate ob mpocévTwy odict yevea- 
Aoyar, GAAa re TAdcacbat deddKaot Kai wadora é¢ Ta yévyn TOY Hpdwr. See 
Heyne ad Apollodér. iii. 15, 4. “Eumolpi nomen modo communicatum 
pluribus, modo plurium hominum res et facta cumulata in unum. Is ad 
quem Hercules venisse dicitur, serior state fuit: antiquior est is de quo hoe 
loco agitur....... antecessisse tamen hunc debet alius, qui cum Triptolemo 
vixit,” ete. See the learned and valuable comments of Lobeck in his Aglao- 
phamus, tom. i. p. 206-213: in regard to the discrepancies of this narrative 
he observes, I think, with great justice (p. 211), “ quo uno exemplo ex innu- 
merabilibus delecto, arguitur eorum temeritas, qui ex variis discordibusque 
poetarum et mythographorum narratiunculis, antique fame formam et quasi 
lineamenta recognosci posse sperant.” 


a 


902 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


lemus, Dioklés, Polyxeinus and Dolichus: Keleos is the king, 
or principal among these chiefs, the son or lineal descendant of 
the eponymous Eleusis himself. To these chiefs, and to the three 
daughters of Keleos, the goddess Démétér comes in her sorrow 
for the loss of her daughter Persephoné: being hospitably enter- 
tained by Keleos she reveals her true character, commands that 
a temple shall be built to her at Eleusis, and prescribes to them 
the rites according to which they are to worship her.! Such 
seems to have been the ancient story of the Eleusinians respect- 
ing their own religious antiquities: Keleos, with Metaneira his 
wife, and the other chiefs here mentioned, were worshipped at 
Eleusis, and from thence transferred to Athens as local gods or 
heroes.2 Eleusis became incorporated with Athens, apparently 
not very long before the time of Solén; and the Eleusinian wor- 
ship of Démétér was then received into the great religious 
solemnities of the Athenian state, to which it owes its remarkable 
subsequent extension and commanding influence. In the Atti- 
cized worship of the Eleusinian Démétér, the Eumolpids and the 
Kérykes were the principal hereditary functionaries: Eumolpus, 
the eponym of this great family, came thus to play the principal 
part in the Athenian legendary version of the war between 
Athens and Eleusis. An oracle had pronounced that Athens 
could only be rescued from his attack by the death of the three 
daughters of Erechtheus ; their generous patriotism consented to 
the sacrifice, and their father put them to death. He then went 
forth confidently to the battle, totally vanquished the enemy, and 





1 Homer, Hymn. ad Cerer. 153-475.— 
baw Sees ‘H dé kiovoa SeuorordAog Bacidedat 
Acigev Tpimrodéup te, AcoxAci re wAntinrg, 
EipoArov te Bin, Keréw 9 hygnropt AaGr, 
Apnopoocbyny iepov. 
Also y. 105. 
Ti 62 idov Ketéoto’ EXevotvidao Siyarpes. 
The hero Eleusis is mentioned in Pausanias, i. 38, 7: some said that he was 
the son of Hermés, others that he was the son of Ogygus. Compare Hygin. 
f. 147, 

* Keleos and Metaneira were worshipped by the Athenians with divine 
honors (Athenagoras, Legat. p. 53, ed. Oxon.): perhaps he confounds divine 
and heroic honors, as the Christian controversialists against Paganism were 
disposed to do. Triptolemus had a temple at Eeasis (Pausan. i. 38, 6) 


DAUGHTERS OF ERECHTHEUS. 203 


silled Eumolpus with his own hand.! Erechtheus was wor- 
shipped as a god, and his daughters as goddesses, at Athens.? 
Their names and their exalted devotion were cited along with 
those of the warriors of Marathén, in the public assembly of 
Athens, by orators who sought to arouse the languid patriot, or 
to denounce the cowardly deserter; and the people listened both 
to one and the other with analogous feelings of grateful veneration, 
as well as with equally unsuspecting faith in the matter of fact.3 





1? Apollodér. iii. 15,4. Some said that Immaradus, son of Eumolpus, had 
been killed by Erechtheus (Pausan. i. 5, 2); others, that both Eumolpus and 
his son had experienced this fate (Schol. ad Eurip. Pheeniss. 854). But we 
learn from Pausanias himself what the story in the interior of the Erechtheion 
was, — that Erechtheus killed Eumolpus (i. 27, 3). 

2 Cicero, Nat. Deor. iii. 19 ; Philochor. ap. Schol. Gidip. Col. 100. Three 
daughters of Erechtheus perished, and three daughters were worshipped 
(Apollodér. iii. 15,4; Hesychius, Zedyoc tpixaptevov; Eurip. Erechtheus. 
Fragm. 3, Dindorf); but both Euripidés and Apollodérus said that Erech- 
theus was only required to sacrifice, and only did sacrifice, one,— the other 
two slew themselves voluntarily, from affection for their sister. I cannot but 
think (in spite of the opinion of Welcker to the contrary, Griechisch. Trag6d. 
ii. p.722) that the genuine legend represented Erechtheus as having sacrificed 
all three, as appears in the Ién of Euripidés (276) : — 

Ton. ITarip’ Epexdede ode &0vce avyyovouc ; 
Cretsa. “ErdAn mpd yaiat opayta rapSévovg kraveiv. 
Ion. 20 0 HeodOne ric kaovyyqtov p6vn; 
Creisa. Bpédoc véoyvov untpo¢ hv év ayxardate. 
Compare with this passage, Demosthen. Adyo¢ ’ Excrag. p. 1397, Reisk 
Just before, the death of the three daughters of Kekrops, for infringing the 
commands of Athéné, had been mentioned. Euripidés modified this in his 
Erechtheus, for he there introduced the mother Praxithea consenting to the 
immolation of one daughter, for the rescue of the country from a foreign in- 
vader: to propose to a mother the immolation of three daughters at once, 
would have been too revolting. In most instances we find the strongly 
marked features, the distinct and glaring incidents as well as the dark con- 
trasts, belong to the Hesiodic or old Post-Homeric legend; the changes made 
afterwards go to soften, dilute, and to complicate,in proportion as the feel- 
ings of the public become milder and more humane ; sometimes however the 
later poets add new horrors. 

3 See the striking evidence contained in the oration of Lykurgus against 
Leocratés (p. 201-204. Reiske ; Demosthen. Ady.’ Excrag. l,c.;, and Xeno- 
phon, Memor. iii. 5,9): from the two latter passages we see that the Athe- 
nian story represented the invasion under Eumolpus as a combined assault 
from the western continent. 


204 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Though Erechtheus gained the victory over Eumolpus, yet 
the story represents Poseidén as having put an end to the life 
and reign of Erechtheus, who was (it seems) slain in the battle. 
He was succeeded by his son Kekrops IL, and the latter again by 
his son Pandidn II.,1—two names unmarked by any incidents, 
and which appear to be mere duplication of the former Kekrops 
and Pandién, placed there by the genealogizers for the purpose 
of filling up what seemed to them a chronological chasm. The 
Attic legends were associated chiefly with a few names of respect- 
ed eponymous personages ; and if the persons called the children 
of Pandién were too numerous to admit of their being con- 
veniently ascribed to one father, there was no difficulty in che A 
posing a second prince of the same name. 

Apolloddrus passes at once from Erechtheus to his son Kekrops 
II, then to Pandidn IL, next to the four sons of the latter, ageus, 
Pallas, Nisus and Lykus. But the tragedians here insert the 
story of Xuthus, Kreiisa and l6n; the latter being the son of 
Kreiisa by Apollo, but given by the god to Xuthus, and adopted 
by the latter as his own. I6n becomes the successor of Erech- 
theus, and his sons Teleon, Hoplés, Argadés and Aigikorés 
become the eponyms of the four ancient tribes of Athens, which 
subsisted until the revolution of Kleisthenés. én himself is the 
eponym of the Idnic race both in Asia, in Europe, and in the 
£gean islands: .Dérus and Achwus are the sons of Kreiisa by 
Xuthus, so that I6n is distinguished from both of them by being 
of divine parentage.? ‘According to the story given by Philocho- 
rus, I6n rendered such essential service in rescuing the Athenians 
from the attack of the Thracians under Eumolpus, that he was 
afterwards made king of the country, and distributed all the in- 
habitants into four tribes or castes, corresponding to different 
modes of life, —soldiers, husbandmen, goatherds, and artisans.3 
And it. seems that the legend explanatory of the origin of the 
festival Boédromia, originally important enough to furnish a name 





? Apollodér. iii. 15, 5; Eurip. I6n, 282; Erechth. Fragm. 20, Dindorf, 

® Enurip. I6n. 1570-1595 The Kreiisa of Sophoklés, a lost tragedy, seems 
to have related to the same subject. 

Pausanias (vii. 1, 2) tells us that Xuthus was chosen to arhiteate between 
the contending lain of the sons of Erechtheus, 

* Philochor. ap. Harpccrat. v. Bondpéuca; Strabo, viii. p. 883 


PANDION AND 2:GEUS. 205 


to one of the Athenian months, was attached to the aid thus rene 
dered by I6n.1 

We pass from I6n to persons of far greater mythical dignity 
and interest, — ASgeus and his son Théseus. 

Pandién had four sons, A®geus, Nisus, Lykus, and Pallas, 
between whom he divided his dominions. Nisus received the 
territory of Megaris, which had been under the sway of Pandién, 
and there founded the seaport of Niszea. Lykus was made king 
of the eastern coast, but a dispute afterwards ensued, and he quit- 
ted the country altogether, to establish himself on the southern 
coast of Asia Minor among the Termilz, to whom he gave the 
name of Lykians.2 Aigeus, as the eldest of the four, became 
king of Athens; but Pallas received a portion both of the south- 
western coast and the interior, and he as well as his children 
appear as frequent enemies both to A%geus and to Théseus. 
Pallas is the eponym of the déme Palléné, and the stories 
respecting him and his sons seem to be connected with old and 
standing feuds among the different démes of Attica, originally 
independent communities. These feuds penetrated into the 
legend, and explain the story which we find that A®geus and 
Théseus were not genuine Erechtheids, the former being denomi- 
nated a supposititious child to Pandién.3 © 

Zégeus* has little importance in the mythical history except as 
the father of Théseus: it may even be doubted whether his name 
is anything more than a mere cognomen of the god Poseidén, who 
was (as we are told) the real father of this great Attic Héraklés. 
As I pretend only to give a very brief outline of the general 
territory of Grecian legend, I cannot permit myself to recount in 





1 Philochor. ap. Harpocrat. v. Bondpouca. 

2 Sophokl. ap. Strab. ix, p. 392; Herodot. i. 173; Strabo, xii. p. 573. 

3 Plutarch, Thésens, ¢. 13, Alyede Setd¢ yevouevog Navdiovt, cai pndév 
roig *Epexdeidarc xpoojkwv. _Apollodor. iii. 15, 6. 

4 ZEgeus had by Médea (who took refuge at Athens after her flight from 
Corinth) a son named Médus, who passed into Asia, and was considered as 
the eponymus and progenitor of the Median people. Datis, the general who 
commanded the invading Persian army at the battle of Marathén, sent a 
formal communication to the Athenians announcing himself as the descend- 
ant of Médas, and requiring to be admitted as king of Attica: such is the 
statement of Diodérus (Exc. Vatic. vii.-x. 48: see also Schol. Aristophan 
Pac. 289). ‘ 


206 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


detail the chivalrous career of Théseus, who is found both in the 
Kalydonian boar-hunt and in the Argonautic expedition — his 
personal and victorious encounters with the robbers Sinnis, Pro- 
crustés, Periphétés, Scirén and others — his valuable service in 
ridding his country of the Krommyonian sow and the Marathé 
nian bull —his conquest of the Minotaur in Kréte, and his escape 
from the dangers of the labyrinth by the aid of Ariadné, whom 
he subsequently carries off and abandons— his many amorous 
adventures, and his expeditions both against the Amazons and 
into the under-world along with Peirithous.1 

Thucydidés delineates the character of Théseus as a man who 
combined sagacity with political power, and who conferred upon 
his country the inestimable benefit of uniting all the separate and 
self-governing démes of Attica into one common political society.2 
From the well-earned reverence attached to the assertion of 
Thucydidés, it has been customary to reason upon this assertion 
as if it were historically authentic, and to treat the romantic 
attributes which we find in Plutarch and Dioddrus as if they were 
fiction superinduced upon this basis of fact. Such a view of the 
case is in my judgment erroneous. The athletic and amorous 
knight-errant is the old version of the character—the profound 





1 Ovid, Metamorph. vii. 433.— 
tela ob lasmibteats “Te, maxime Theseu, 
Mirata est Marathon Cretai sanguine Tauri: 
Quodque Suis securus arat Cromyona colonus, 
Munus opusque tuum est. Tellus Epidauria per te 
Clavigeram vidit Vulcani occumbere prolem : 
Vidit et immanem Cephisias ora Procrustem. 
Cercyonis letum vidit Cerealis Eleusin. 
Occidit ille Sinis,” etc. 

Respecting the amours of Théseus, Ister especially seems to have enterea 
into great details; but some of them were noticed both in the Hesiodic 
poems and by Kekrops, not to mention Pherekydés (Athen. xiii. p. 557). 
Peirithous, the intimate friend and companion of Théseus, is the eponymous 
hero of the Attic déme or gens Perithoidw (Ephorus ap. Photium, y. Iepi- 
Boidat). 

? Thue. ii. 15. ’ Exesd) 62 Oncede éBacidevae, yevipevog werd tov Evperos 
«al dvvatd¢, Ta te dAAa diexdopnoe tiv xdpav, kal KaTdAvoac Tov Gado 
rohewp Ta te BovAevrajpia Kal Tag dpyac, bc Tv viv WARY .......0. fuvpxice 
wavrac. 


THESEUS AND HIS ADVENTURES. 207 


and long-sighted politician is a subsequent correction, introduced 
indeed by men of superior mind, but destitute of historical war- 
ranty, and arising out of their desire to find reasons of their own 
for concurring in the veneration which the general public paid 
more easily and heartily to their national hero. Théseus, in the 
Iliad and Odyssey, fights with the Lapithz against the Centaurs: 
Théseus, in the Hesiodic poems, is misguided by his passion for 
the beautiful /&glé, daughter of Panopeus:! and the Théseus 
described in Plutarch’s biography is in great part a continuation 
and expansion of these same or similar attributes, mingled with 
many local legends, explaining, like the Fasti of Ovid, or the 
lost Aitia of Kallimachus, the original genesis of prevalent reli- 
gious and secial customs.2 Plutarch has doubtless greatly soften- 
ed down and modified the adventures which he found in the Attic 
logographers as well as in the poetical epics called Théséis. 
For in his preface to the life of Théseus, after having emphati- 
cally declared that he is about to transcend the boundary both of 
the known. and the knowable, but that the temptation of comparing 
the founder of Athens with the founder of Rome is irresistible, 
he concludes with the following remarkable words: “I pray that 
this fabulous matter may be so far obedient to my endeavors as 
to receive, when purified by reason, the aspect of history: in 
those cases where it haughtily scorns plausibility and will admit 
no alliance with what is probable, I shall beg for indulgent hear- 
ers, willing to receive antique narrative in a mild spirit." We 
see here that Plutarch sat down, not to recount the old fables as 
. he found them, but to purify them by reason and to impart to 
them the aspect of history. We have to thank him for having 
retained, after this purification, so much of what is romantic and 
marvellous ; but we may be sure that the sources from which he 
borrowed were more romantic and marvellous still. It was the 





? Tiiad, i. 265; Odyss. xi. 321. I do not notice the suspected line, Odyss. 
xi. 630. 

? Diodorus also, from his disposition to assimilate Théseus to Héraklés, 
has given us his chivalrous as well as his political attributes(iv. 61). 

3 Plutarch, Théseus, i. Ein piv oby fuiv, éxxadatpipevov Ady td puddde¢ 
trakovcat kal AaBeiv icropiag Sytv* bxov & dv abadic rod rvSavod Tept- 
dpor7, kai u) déxntrac ryv mpd¢gtd elkd¢e pigsty, ebyvopdver dxpoaray 
Senoopeda, kal mpgw¢ THv Gpyatodoyiav mpocdexouévar. 


* 
208 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


tendency of the enlightened men of Athens, from the days of 
Solén downwards, to refine and politicize the character of Thé« 
seus:! even Peisistratus expunged from one of the Hesiodic 
poems the line which described the violent passion of the hero 
for the fair AXglé:? and the tragic poets found it more congenial 
to the feelings of their audience to exhibit him as a dignified 
and liberal sovereign, rather than as an adventurous single-handed 
fighter. But the logographers and the Alexandrine poets re- 
mained more faithful to the old fables. The story of Hekalé, the 
hospitable old woman who received and blessed Théseus when 
he went against the Marathénian bull, and whom he found dead 
when he came back to recount the news of his success, was 
treated by Kallimachus:3 and Virgil must have had his mind 
full of the unrefined legends when he numbered this Attic Héra- 
klés among the unhappy sufferers condemned to endless penance 
in the under-world.4 

Two however among the Théseian fables cannot be dismissed 
without some special notice, — the war against the Amazons, and 
the expedition against Kréte. The former strikingly illustrates 
the facility as well as the tenacity of Grecian legendary faith ; 
the latter embraces the story of Dedalus and Minos, two of the 
most eminent among Grecian ante-historical personages. 

The Amazons, daughters of Arés and Harmonia,5 are both 


* See Isokratés, Panathenaic. (t. ii. p. 510-512, Auger) ; Xenoph. Memor, 
iii. 5,10. In the Helene Encomium, Isokratés enlarges more upon the per- 
sonal exploits of Théseus in conjunction with his great political merits (t. ii. 
p- 342-350, Auger). 

2 Plutarch, Théseus, 20. 

* See the epigram of Krinagoras, Antholog. Pal. vol. ii. p. 144; ep. xv. 
ed. Brunck. and Kallimach. Frag. 40. 

*Acides 6’ (Kallimachus) ‘ExdAng te d:Aogeivoto xarcdv, 
Kai Oncei Mapadav ob¢ éxédnxe révove. 

Some beautiful lines are preserved by Suidas, v. "ExaiAca, rept ‘Exaang 
Savotong HOOPER spoken by Théseus himself, see Plutarch, Theseus, ¢, 
14). 





"Idi, mpneia yuvackdr, 
Thy oddv, Rv dviat Suuadyéec ob repdwou - 
TloAAaxz cei’, © pata, piAokeivoro Karte 
Mvqobpeda: Evvdv yap érabdov £oxev Gract. 
* Virgil, Aneid, vi. 617. “Sedet seternumque sedebit Infelix Théseus ” 
® Pherekyd. Fragm. 25, Didot. 


* 
THE AMAZONS 209 


early creations and frequent reproductions of the ancient epic —_ 
which was indeed, we may generally remark, largely occupied 
both with the exploits and sufferings of women, or heroines, the 
wives and daughters of the Grecian heroes—and which recog- 
nized in Pallas Athéné the finished type of an irresistible female 
warrior. A nation of courageous, hardy and indefatigable women, 
dwelling apart from men, permitting only a short temporary in- 
tercourse for the purpose of renovating their numbers, and burn- 
ing out their right breast with a view of enabling themselves to 
draw the bow freely, — this was at once a general type stimu- 
lating to the fancy of the poet and a theme eminently popular 
with his hearers. Nor was it at all repugnant to the faith of the 
latter — who had no recorded facts to guide them, and no other 
standard of credibility as to the past except such poetical nar- 
ratives themselves —to conceive communities of Amazons as 
having actually existed in anterior time. Accordingly we find 
these warlike females constantly reappearing in the ancient poems, 
and universally accepted as past realities. In the Iliad, when 
Priam wishes to illustrate emphatically the most numerous host 
in which he ever found himself included, he tells us that it was 
assembled in Phyrgia, on the banks of the Sangarius, for the 
purpose of resisting the formidable Amazons. When Bellero- 
phén is to be employed on a deadly and perilous undertaking,! 
by those who indirectly wish to procure his death, he is despatch- 
ed against the Amazons. Inthe Athiopis of Arktinus, describing 
the post-Homeric war of Troy, Penthesileia, queen of the Ama- 
zons, appears as the most effective ally of the besieged city, and 
as the most formidable enemy of the Greeks, succumbing only 
to the invincible might of Achilles.2 The Argonautic heroes find 
the Amazons on the river Thermddon, in their expedition along 





Iliad, iii. 186 ; vi. 152. 

® See Proclus’s Argument of the lost Athiopis (Fragm. Epicor. Grecor. 
ed. Diintzer, p.16). We are reduced to the first book of Quintus Smyrnus 
for some idea of the valor of Penthesileia ; it is supposed to be copied more 
or less closely from the Zthiopis. See Tychsen’s Dissertation prefixed to 
his edition of Quintus, sections 5 and 12. Compare Dio. Chrysostom. Or. 
xi. p. 350, Reiske. Philostratus (Heroica, c. 19. p. 751) gives a strange 
transformation of this old epical narrative into a Cescent of Amazons upon 
the island sacred to Achilles. 


VOL. I. 14oce. 


- 
210 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


the southern coast of the Euxine. To the same spot Heéraclés 
goes to attack them, in the performance of the ninth labor im- 
posed upon him by Eurystheus, for the purpose of procuring the 
girdle of the Amazonian queen, Hippolyté;! and we are told 
that they had not yet recovered from the losses sustained in this 
severe aggression when Théseus also assaulted and defeated them, 
carrying off their queen, Antiopé.? This injury they avenged 
by invading Attica, —an undertaking as Plutarch justly observes) 
“neither trifling nor feminine,” especially if according to the 
statement of Hellanikus, they crossed the Cimmerian Bosporus 
on the winter ice, beginning their march from the Asiatic side of 
the Paulus Mzotis.3 They overcame all the resistances and dif 
ficulties of this prodigious march, and penetrated even into Athens 
itself, where the final battle, hard-fought and at one time doubt- 
ful, by which Théseus crushed them, was fought—in the very 





? Apollon. Rhod. ii. 966, 1004; Apollod. ii. 5-9; Diodér. ii, 46; iv. 16. 
The Amazons were supposed to speak the Thracian language (Schol. Apoll 
Rhod, ii, 953), though some authors asserted them to be natives of Libyia, 
others of A&thiopia (2b. 965). 

Hellanikus (Frag. 33, ap. Schol. Pindar. Nem. iii. 65) said that all the 
Argonauts had assisted Héraklés in this expedition: the fragment of the old 
epic poem (perhaps the ’Avalévia) there quoted mentions Telam6n specially. 

? The many diversities in the story respecting Théseus and the Amazon 
Antiopé are well set forth in Bachet de Meziriac (Commentaires sur Ovide, 
t. i. p. 317). 

Welcker (Der Epische Cyclus, p. 313) supposes that the ancient epic poem 
ealled by Suidas ’Awafovia, related to the invasion of Attica by the Ama- 
zons, and that this poem is the same, under another title, as the ’ArWi¢ of 
Hegesinous cited by Pausanias: I cannot say that he establishes: this con- 
jecture satisfactorily, but the chapter is well worth consulting. The epic 
Théséis seems to have given a version of the Amazonian contest in many 
respects different from that which Plutarch has put together out of the logo- 
graphers (see Plut. Thés. 28): it contained a narrative of many unconnect- 
ed exploits belonging to Théseus, and Aristotle censures it on that account 
as ill-constructed (Poetic. c. 17). 

The ’Auafovic or ’Avafovixd of Onasus can hardly have been (as Heyne 
supposes, ad Apollod. ii. 5, 9) an epic poem: we may infer from the ration- 
alizing tendency of the citation from it (Schol. ad Theocrit. xiii. 46, and 
Schol. Apollén. Rhod. i. 1207) that it was a work in prose. There was an 
"Auatovic by Possis of Magnésia (Athenzeus, vii. p. 296). 

* Plutarch, Théseus, 27. Pindar (Olymp. xiii. 84) represents the Amazons 
as having come from the extreme north, when Bellerophén conquers them. 


INVASION OF ATTICA BY THE AMAZONS. 211 


heart of thé city. Attic antiquaries confidently pointed out the 
exact position of the two contending armies: the left wing of the 
Amazons rested upon the spot occupied by the commemorative 
monument called the Amazoneion; the right wing touched the 
Pnyx, the place in which the public assemblies of the Athenian 
democracy were afterwards held. The details and fluctuations 
of the combat, as well as the final triumph and consequent truce, 
were recounted by these authors with as complete faith and as 
much circumstantiality as those of the battle of Plateea by Herod- 
otus. The sepulchral edifice called the Amazoneion, the tomb 
or pillar of Antiopé near the western gate of the city —the spot 
called the Horkomosion near the temple of Théseus — even the 
hill of Areiopagus itself; and the sacrifices which it was custom- 
ary to offer to the Amazons at the periodical festival of the Thé- 
seia-were all so many religious mementos of this victory ;! 
which was moreover a favorite subject of art both with the 
sculptor and the painter, at Athens as well as in other parts of 
Greece. 

No portion of the ante-historical epic appears to have been more 
deeply worked into the national mind of Greece than this inva- 
sion and defeat of the Amazons. It was not only a constant theme 
of the logographers, but was also familiarly appealed to by the 
popular orators along with Marathén and Salamis, among those 
antique exploits of which their fellow-citizens might justly be proud. 
It formed a part of the retrospective faith of Herodotus, Lysias, 
Plato and Isokratés,2 and the exact date of the event was settled 





1 Plutarch, Théseus, 27-28; Pausan. i. 2,4; Plato, Axiochus, c. 2; Har- 
pocration, y.’ Auafoveiov ; Aristophan. Lysistrat. 678, with the Scholia. Ais- 
chy]. (Eumenid. 685) says that the Amazons assaulted the citadel from the 
Areiopagus : — 

Iléyov 7’ “Apetov rove’, "Aualovwr édpav 
Exnvac 7’, 67’ RAVov Oncéwe xara oSovov 
ErparynAarovaat, kai TOA vedrToALv 
Tid’ inpixupyov dvreripywody more. 

? Herodot. ix. 27, Lysias (Epitaph, ¢. 8) represents the Amazons as dp- 
yovoat ToAAdv ESvwyv: the whole race, according to him, was nearly extin- 
guished in their unsuccessful and calamitous invasion of Attica. Isokratés 
(Panegyric. t. i. p. 206, Auger) says the same; also Panathénaic, t. iii. p. 560, 
Auger; Demosth: Epitaph. p. 1391. Reisk.. Pausanias quotes Pindar’s no- 
tice of the invasion, and with the fullest belief of its historical reality (vii. 2, 4) 


212 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


by the chronologists.1_ Nor did the Athenians stand alone in such 
a belief. Throughout many other regions of Greece, both Euro- 
pean and Asiatic, traditions and memorials of the Amazons were 
found. At Megara, at Troezen, in Laconia near Cape Tznarus, 
at Chzroneia in Beedtia, and in more than one part of Thessaly, 
sepulchres or monuments of the Amazons were preserved. The 
warlike women (it was said), on their way to Attica, had not 
traversed those countries, without leaving some evidences of their 
passage.? 

Amongst the Asiatic Greeks the supposed traces of the aaa 
were yet more numerous. Their proper territory was asserted to 
be the town and plain of Themiskyra, near the Grecian colony of 
Amisus, on the river Thermédén, a region called, after their name 
by Roman historians and geographers. But they were believed 
to have conquered and occupied in early times a much wider range 
of territory, extending even to the coast of Iénia and Zolis. 
Ephesus, Smyrna, Kymé, Myrina, Paphos and Sinopé were af- 
firmed to have been founded and denominated by them.4 Some 





Plato mentions the invasion of Attica by the Amazons in the Menexenus 
(c.9), but the passage in the treatise De Legg. c. ii. p. 804, —dxotwv yap d7 
podouve madatode Térevopuat, etc. — is even a stronger evidence of his own be- 
lief. And Xenophén in the Anabasis, when he compares the quiver and the 
hatchet of his barbarous enemies to “those which the Amazons carry,” evi- 
dently believed himself to be speaking of real persons, though he could have 
seen only the costumes and armature of those painted by Mikén and others 
(Anabas. iv. 4, 10; compare Aschl. Supplic. 293, and Aristophan. Lysistr. 
678; Lucian. Anachars, c. 34. v. iii. p. 318). 

How copiously the tale was enlarged upon by the authors of the ——- 
we see in Plutarch, Théseus, 27-28. 

Hekatezus (ap. Steph. Byz. ’Awafoveiov ; also Fragm. 350, 351, 352, Di- 
dot) and Xanthus (ap. Hesychium, v. BovAewiy) both treated of the Ama- 
zons: the laiter passage ought to oe added to the collection of the Fragments 
of Xanthus by Didot. 

? Clemens Alexancr. Stromat, i. p. 336; bisiaie Parium, Epoch. 21. 

? Plutarch, Thés. 27-28. Steph. Byz. * *Auafoveiov. Pausan. ii. 32, 83 
iii. 25, 2. 

% Pherekydés ap. Schol. Apollon. Rh. ii. 373-992; Justin, ii. 4; Strabo, 
xii. p. 547, Oeuioxvpay, rd Tv ’Aualovuy oixnrgptov; Dioddr. ii. 45-46; 
Sallust ap. Serv. ad Virgil. Aineid. xi. 659; Pompon. Mela, i. 19; Plin. H. 
N. vi. 4. The geography of Quintus Curtius (vi.4) and of Philostratus (He- 
roic. ¢. 19) is on this point indefinite, and even inconsistent. 

Ephor. Fragm. 87, Didot. Strabo, xi. p.505; xiii p. 573; xiii. p. 622 


AMAZONS IN ASIA. aC". ae 


authors placed them in Libya or Ethiopia; and when the Pontie 
Greeks on the north-western shore of the Euxine had become 
acquainted with the hardy and daring character of the Sarmatian 
maidens, — who were obliged to have slain each an enemy in 
battle as the condition of obtaining a husband, and who artificially 
prevented the growth of the right breast during childhood, — they 
could imagine no more satisfactory mode of accounting for such 
attributes than by deducing the Sarmatians from a colony of va- 
grant Amazons, expelled by the Grecian heroes from their terri- 
tory on the Thermédén.' Pindar ascribed the first. establishment 
of the memorable temple of Artemis at Ephesus to the Amazons. 
And Pausanias explains in part the preéminence which this tem- 
ple enjoyed over every other in Greece by the widely diffused 
renown of its female founders,? respecting whom he observes 
(with perfect truth, if we admit the historical character of the old 
epic), that women possess an unparalleled force of resolution in 
resisting adverse events, since the Amazons, after having been 
first roughly handled by Héraklés and then completely defeated 





Pausan. iy. 31,6; vii. 2.4. Tacit. Ann. iii. 61, Schol. Apollon. Rhod. ii. 
965. : 

The derivation of the name Sinopé from an Amazon was given by Heka 
teeus (Fragm. 352). Themiskyra also had one of the Amazons for its epony- 
mus (Appian, Bell. Mithridat. 78). 

Some of the most venerated religious legends at Sinopé were attached to 
the expedition of Héraklés against the Amazons: Autolykus, the oraclo- 
giving hero, worshipped with great solemnity even at the time when the town 
was besieged by Lucullus, was the companion of Héraclés (Appian, ib. ¢.83), 
Even a small mountain village in the territory of Ephesus, called Latoreia, 
derived its name from one of the Amazons (Athene. i. p. 31). 

1 Herodot. iv. 108-117, where he gives the long tale, imagined by the Pon- 
tic Greeks, of the origin of the Sarmafian nation. Compare Hippokratés, De 
Aére, Locis et Aquis, c.17; Ephorus, Fragm.103 ; Skymn. Chius, v, 192; 
Plato, Legg. vii. p. 804 ; Diodor. ii. 34. 


The testimony of Hippokratés certifies the practice of the Sarmatian wo- 
men to check the growth of the right breast : Tov défcov 6? walov odx Exovow. 
Tacdiotos yap bovow éri vynriovow ai wntépes yaAKeiov Terexvquevov én’ abrég 
tobTy dLarupov Toléovoat, Tpd¢ TOV waloy Tutéaor Tov déEtov* Kat éxtkateTat, 
bore tiv abggow g8eipeodat, é¢ J8 Tov déStov Oyov Kai Bpaxiova rdcav Thy 
foxvy Kal 7d TAH VIo¢ éxdiddvat. 

Ktésias also compares a warlike Sakian wonian to the Amazons (Fragm 
Persic. ii. pp. 221, 449, Bahr). 

2 Pausan. iv.3),6; vii. 2,4. Dionys. Periégét. 828 


214 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


by Théseus, could yet find courage to play so conspicuous wart 
in the defence of Troy against the Grecian besiegers.! r 

It is thus that in what is called early Grecian history, as the 
Greeks themselves looked back upon it, the Amazons were among 
the most prominent and undisputed personages. Nor will the cir- 
cumstance appear wonderful if we reflect, that the belief in them 
was first established at a time when the Grecian mind was fed 
with nothing else but religious legend and epic poetry, and that 
the incidents of the supposed past, as received from these sources, 
were addressed to their faith and feelings, without being required 
to adapt themselves to any canons of credibility drawn from 
present experience. - But the time came when the historians of 
Alexander the Great audaciously abused this ancient credence. 
Amongst other tales calculated to exalt the dignity of that monarch, 
they affirmed that after his conquest and subjugation of the Per- 
sian empire, he had been visited in Hyrcania by Thalestris, queen 
of the Amazons, who admiring his warlike prowess, was anxious to 
be enabled to return into her own country in a condition'to produce 
offspring of a breed so invincible.2 But the Greeks had now been 
accustomed for a century and a half to historical and philosophical 
criticism —and that uninquiring faith, which was readily accorded 
to the wonders of the past, could no longer be invoked for them 
when tendered as present reality. For the fable of the Amazons 
was here reproduced in its naked simplicity, without being ration- 
alized or painted over with historical colors. 

Some literary men indeed, among whom were Démétrius ot 
Skepsis, and the Mitylenzean Theophanés, the companion of Pom- 
pey in his expeditions, still continued their belief both in Ama- 
zons present and Amazons past ; and when it becomes notorious 
that at least there were none stich on the banks of the Thermédén, 
these authors supposed them to have migrated from their original 
locality, and to have settled in the unvisited regions north of 
Mount Caucasus.3 Strabo, on the contrary, feeling that the grounds 





1 Pausan. i.15, 2. 

? Arrian, Exped. Alex. vii. 13; compare iv. 15; Quint. Curt. vi. 4; Jus- 
tin, xlii. 4. The note of Freinshemius on the above passage of Quintus Cur- 
tius is full of valuable references on the subject of the Amazons, 

? Strabo, xi. p. 503-504; Appian, Bell. Mithridat. c. 103; Plutarch, Pom 


STRABO AND ARRIAN. 215 


of disbelief applied with equal force to the ancient stories and to 
the modern, rejected both the one and the other. But he remarks 
at the same time, not without some surprise, that it was usual 
with most persons to adopt a middle course, — to retain the Amae 
zons as historical phenomena of the remote past, but to disallow 
them as realities of the present, and to maintain that the breed 
had died out.!_ The accomplished intellect of Julius Cesar did not 
scruple to acknowledge them as having once conquered and held 
in dominion a large portion of Asia;? and the compromise be- 
tween early, traditional, and religious faith on the one hand, and 





peius, c. 35, Plin. N. H.vi.7. Plutarch still retains the old deseription of 
Amazons from the mountains near the Therméd6n. Appian keeps clear of 
this geographical error, probably copying more exactly the language of The- 
ophanés, who must have been well aware that when Lucullus besieged The- 
miskyra, he did not find it defended by the Amazons (see Appian, Bell. Mith- 
ridat.c. 78). Ptolemy (v. 9) places the Amazons in the imperfectly known 
regions of Asiatic Sarmatia, north of the Caspian and near the river Rha 
(Volga). “This fabulous community of women (observes Forbiger) Hand 

Such der alten Geographie, ii. 77, p.457) was a phenomenon much too inter- 
esting for the geographers easily to relinquish.” 

>} Strabo, xi. p. 505. “Iduov dé re ovpBésnne TH AOyw rept Tov. ’Auatévev 
Ol piv yap GAAot 7d uvdGde¢ Kat TO ioTopiKdy Stwpicpevov Exovot* Ta yap Ta- 
Aaa Kat pevd7 Kat TepaTadn, pidor Karodvrac [ Note. Strabo does not always 
speak of the ior in this disrespectful tone; he is sometimes much displeased 
with those who dispute the existence of an historical kernel in the inside, 
especially with regard to Homer.] 7 0’ icropia BotAerat rdAn dic, dvte Tada- 
tov, avre véov* Kal Td TEpaTadec 7 ob Exet, 7) oraviov. Tlept d2 rav ’Aualover 
Ta abra Aéyeras kal viv. xal- radal, teparady 7’ bvra, Kal ricteag Téppo. 
Tic yap dv miorboeiev, O¢ yuvatkGy orparoc, 7 TALC, 7) ESOC, cvoTain dv réTE 
xopic dvdpdv; Kat ob povov ovotain, GAA Kat Edddoug wotpoarto Ent Thy ad- 
Aotpiav, kal kpatrnoeev ob. Tév éyyd¢ povov, Gate Kai péxpt THE viv "loviag 
mpoeaAveiv, GAAd kal Scarévriov oteidarto oTpatiay péxpt THy ’ATTiKhe; "AAA 
tiny radta ye aitad xa? viv Aéyetar mepiaitav: émtreiver d& THY 
idtérnra Kxai Td wioretecdat Ta TarAard padAAov Ta 
viv. There are however, other passages in which he speaks of the Ama- 
zons as realities. 

Justin (ii. 4) recognizes the great power and extensive conquests of the 
Amazons in very early times, but says that they gradually declined down to 
the reign of Alexander, in whose time there were just a few remaining; the 
queen with these few visited Alexander, but shortly afterwards the whole 
breed became extinct. This hypothesis has the merit of convenience, per 
haps of ingenuity. 

* Suctonius, Jul. Cesar,c 22. “In Syrid quoque regrasse Semiramin 


fee. 


216 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


established habits of critical research on the other, adopted by 
the historian Arrian, deserves to be transcribed in his own word 
as illustrating strikingly the powerful sway of the old legends 
even over the most positive-minded Greeks :—“ Neither Aris- 
tobulus nor Ptolemy (he observes), nor any other competent wit- 
ness, has recounted this (visit of the Amazons and their queen 
to Alexander): nor does it seem to me that the race of the 
Amazons was preserved down to that time, nor have they been 
noticed either by any one before Alexander, or by Xenophon, 
though he mentions both the Phasians and the Kolchians, and 
the other barbarous nations which the Greeks saw both before 
and after their arrival at Trapezus, in which marches they must 
have met with the Amazons, if the latter had been still in exist- 
ence. Yet ¢t ¢s incredible to me that this race of women, celebra- 
ted as they have been by authors so many and so commanding, 
should never have existed at all. 'The story tells of Héraklés, 
that he set out from Greece and brought back with him the 
girdle of their queen Hippolyté; also of Théseus and the Athe- 
nians, that they were the first who defeated in battle and repel- 
led these women in their invasion of Europe; and the combat 
of the Athenians with the Amazons has been painted by Mikén, 
not less than that between the Athenians and the Persians. More- 
over Herodotus has spoken in many places of these women, and 
those Athenian orators who have pronounced panegyrics on the 
citizens slain in battle, have dwelt upon the victory over the 
Amazons as among the most memorable of Athenian exploits. 
If the satrap of Media sent any equestrian women at all to Alex- 
ander, I think that they must have come from some of the neigh- 
boring tribes, practised in riding and equipped in the costume 
generally called Amazonian.”! 

There cannot be a more striking evidence of the indelible force 





(Julius Cesar said this), magnamque Asie partem Amazonas tenuisse quon- 
dam.” 

In the splendid triumph of the emperor Aurelian at Rome after the defeat 
of Zenobia, a few Gothic women who had been taken in arms were exhibited 
among the prisoners; the official placard carried along with them announ- 
ced them as Amazons (Vopiscus Aurel. in Histor. August. Scrip. p. 260, ed 
Paris). 

? Arrian, Expedit. Alexand. vii. 13. 


LEGEND AS CONCEIVED BY ARRIAN. 217 


with which these ancient legends were worked into the national 
faith and feelings of the Greeks, than these remarks of a judi- 
cious historian upon the fable of the Amazons. Probably if any 
plausible mode of rationalizing it, and of transforming it into a 
quasi-political event, had been offered to Arrian, he would have 
been better pleased to adopt such a middle term, and would have 
rested comfortably in the supposition that he believed the legend 
in its true meaning, while his less inquiring countrymen were 
imposed upon by the exaggerations of poets. But as the story 
was presented to him plain and unvarnished, either for accept- 
ance or rejection, his feelings as a patriot and a religious man 
prevented him from applying to the past such tests of credibility 
as his untrammelled reason acknowledged to be paramount in 
regard to the present. When we see moreover how much his 
belief was strengthened, and all tendency to scepticism shut out by 
the familiarity of his eye and memory with sculptured or painted 
Amazons!—we may calculate the irresistible force of this sensi- 
ble demonstration on the convictions of the unlettered public, at 
once more deeply retentive of passive impressions, and unaccus- 
tomed to the countervailing habit of rational investigation into 
evidence. Had the march of an army of warlike women, from 
the Thermédén or the Tanais into the heart of Attica, been re- 
counted to Arrian as an incident belonging to the time of Alexan- 
der the Great, he would have rejected it no less emphatically than 
Strab6; but cast back as it was into an undefined past, it took 
rank among the hallowed traditions of divine or heroic antiquity, 
— gratifying to extol by rhetoric, but repulsive to scrutinize in 
argument.? : 





' Ktésias described as real animals, existing in wild and distant regions, 
the heterogeneous and fantastic combinations which he saw sculptured in 
the East (see this stated and illustrated in Bahr, Preface to the Fragm. of 
Ktésias, pp. 58, 59). 

® Heyne observes (Apollodér. ii. 5,9) with respect to the fable of the Ama- 
zons, “In his historiarum fidem aut vestigia nemo quesiverit.” Admitting 
the wisdom of this counsel (and I think it indisputable), why are we required 
to presume, in the absence of all proof, an historical basis for each of those 
other narratives, such as the Kalydénian boar-hunt, the Argonautic expedi- 
tion, or the siege of Troy, which go to make up, along with the story of the 
Amazons, the aggregate matter of Grecian legendary faith? If the tale ef 


VOL. I. 10 


218 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


CHAPTER XII. 


KRETAN LEGENDS.--MINOS AND HIS FAMILY. 


To understand the adventures of Théseus in Kréte, it will be 
necessary to touch briefly upon Minds and the Kreten’ — 
genealogy. 

Minds and Rhadamanthus, according to Homer, are sons of 
Zeus, by Europé,! daughter of the widely-celebrated Phoenix, 





the Amazons could gain currency without any such support, why not other 
portions of the ancient epic ? 

An author of easy belief, Dr. F. Nagel, vindicates the historical reality 
of the Amazons (Geschichte der Amazonen, Stutgart, 1838). I subjoin 
here a different explanation of the Amazonian tale, proceeding from another 
author who rejects the historical basis, and contained in a work of learning 
and value ( Guhl, Ephesiaca, Berlin, 1843, p. 132): — 

“Td tantum monendum videtur, Amazonas nequaquam historice accipien 
das esse, sed e contrario totas ad mythologiam pertinere. Earum enim 
fabulas quum ex frequentinam hierodularum gregibus in cultibus et sacris 
Asiaticis ortas esse ingeniose ostenderit Tolken, jam inter omnes mythologice 
peritos constat, Amazonibus nihil fere nisi peregrini cujusdam cultis notio- 
nem expressum esse, ejusque cum Grecorum religione certamen frequent- 
ibus istis pugnis designatum esse, quas cum Amazonibus tot Graecorum 
heroes habuisse credebantur, Hercules, Bellerophon, Theseus, Achilles, et 
vel ipse, quem Ephesi cultum fuisse supra ostendimus, Dionysus. Qua 
Amazonum notio primaria, quum paulatim Euemeristicd (ut ita dicam) 
ratione ita transformaretur, ut Amazones pro vero feminarum populo habe- 
rentur, necesse quoque erat, ut omnibus fere locis, ubi ejusmodi religionum 
certamina locum habuerunt, Amazones habitasse, vel eo usque processisse, 
crederentur. Quod cum nusquam manifestius fuerit, quam in Asia minore, 
et potissimum in ed parte que Graciam versus vergit, haud mirandum est 
omnes fere ejus ore urbes ab Amazonibus conditas putari.” 

Ido not know the evidence upon which this conjectural interpretation 
«sts, but the statement of it, though it boasts so many supporters among 
.aythological critics, carries no appearance of probability to my mind. Priam 
fights against the Amazons as well as the Grecian heroes. : 

1 Buropé was worshipped with very peculiar solemnity in the island of 
Kréte (see Dictys Cretensis, De Bello Trojano, i. c. 2). 

The venerable plane-tree, under which Zeus and Europé had reposed, was 


KRETAN LEGENDS.—MINOS AND HIS FAMILY. 219 


born in Kréte. Minds is the father of Deukalién, whose son 
Idomeneus, in conjunction with Mérionés, conducts the Krétan 
troops to the host of Agamemnén before Troy. Minds is ruler 
of Knossus, and familiar companion of the great Zeus. He is 
spoken of as holding guardianship in Kréte — not necessarily 
meaning the whole of the island: he is farther decorated with a 
golden sceptre, and constituted judge over the dead in the under- 
world to settle their disputes, in which function Odysseus finds 
him —this however by a passage of comparatively late interpola- 
tion into the Odyssey. He also had a daughter named Ariadné, 
for whom the artist Dedalus fabricated in the town of Knossus 
the representation of a complicated dance, and who was ultimate- 
ly carried off by Théseus: she died in the island of Dia, de- 
serted by Théseus and betrayed by Dionysos to the fatal wrath 
of Artemis. Rhadamanthus seems to approach to Minés both 
in judicial functions and posthumous dignity. He is conveyed 
expressly to Eube, by the semi-divine sea-carriers the Phza- 
cians, to inspect the gigantic corpse of the earth-born Tityus — 
the longest voyage they ever undertook. He is moreover after 
death promoted to an abode of undisturbed bliss in the Elysiar 
plain at the extremity of the earth.! 

_ According to poets later than Homer, Europé is brought over 
by Zeus from Pheenicia to Kréte, where she bears to him three 
sons, Minds, Rhadamanthus and Sarpédon. ‘The latter leaves 
Kréte and settles in Lykia, the population of which, as well as 
that of many other portions of Asia Minor, is connected by va- 





still shown, hard by a fountain at Goetyn in Kréte, in the time of Theophras- 
tus: it was said to be the only plane-tree in the neighborhood which never 
cast its leaves (Theophrast. Hist. Plant. i. 9). 

? Homer, Iliad, xiii. 249, 450; xiv. 321. Odyss. xi. 322-568; xix. 179; 
iv. 564—vii. 321. 

The Homeric Minés in the under-world is not a judge of the previous 
lives of the dead, so as to determine whether they deserve reward or pun- 
ishment for their conduct on earth: such functions are not assigned to him 
earlier than the time of Plato. He administers justice among the dead, who 
are conceived as a sort of society, requiring some presiding judge: depco- 
Tevovra vexvecot, with regard to Minds, is said very much like (Odyss. xi. 
484) viv 0’ aire péya Kparéetc vexvecot with regard to Achilles. See this 
matter partially illustrated in Heyne’s Excursus xi. to the sixth book of the 
Mneid of Virgil. 


220 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


rious mythical genealogies with Kréte, though the Sarpédén ol 
the Iliad has no connection with Kréte, and is not the son of 
Europé. Sarpédon having become king of Lykia, was favored 
by his father, Zeus, with permission to live for three generations.1 
At the same time the youthful Milétus, a favorite of Sarpéd6n, 
quitted Kréte, and established the city which bore his name on 
the coast of Asia Minor. Rhadamanthus became sovereign of 
and lawgiver among the islands in the Augean: he subsequently 
went to Bodtia, where he married the widowed Alkméné, 
mother of Héraklés. 

Europé finds in Kréte a king Asterius, who marries her and 
adopts her children by Zeus: this Astérius is the son of Krés, 
the eponym of the island, or (according to another genealogy by 
which it was attempted to be made out that Minds was of Dorian 
race) he was a son of the daughter of Krés by Tektamus, the 
son of Dorus, who had migrated into the island from Greece. 

Min6s married Pasiphaé, daughter of the god Hélios and Per- 
seis, by whom he had Katreus, Deukalién, Glaukus, Androgeos, 
names marked in the legendary narrative, — together with seve- 
ral daughters, among whom were Ariadné and Phedra. He 
offended Poseidon by neglecting to fulfil a solemnly-made vow, 
and the displeased god afflicted his wife Pasiphaé with a mon- 
strous passion for a bull. The great artist Daedalus, son of Eu- 
palamus, a fugitive from Athens, became the confidant of this 
amour, from which sprang the Minétaur, a creature half man and 
half bull? This Minotaur was imprisoned by Minds in the laby- 
rinth, an inextricable inclosure constructed by Dedalus for that 
express purpose, by order of Minds. 

Minés acquired great nautical power, and expelled the Karian 
inhabitants from many of the islands of the A%gean, which he 
placed under the government of his sons on the footing of tribu- 





1 Apollod6r. iii. 1,2. Kat air@ didaot Zed éxt tpsic yeveiic Gav. This 
eircumstance is evidently imagined by the logographers to account for the 
appearance of Sarpédén in the Trojan war, fighting against Idomeneus, the 
grandson of Minés. Nisus is the eponymus of Nissa, the port of the town 
of Megara: his tomb was shown at Athens (Pausan. i. 19, 5). Minds is the 
eponym of the island of Minoa (opposite the port of Nisea), where it was 
affirmed that the fleet of Minds was stationed (Pausan. i. 44, 5). 

* Apollodér. iii. 1. 2. 


KRETAN LEGENDS.—MINOS AND HIS FAMILY. yaa | 


taries. He undertook several expeditions against various placer 
on the coast—one against Nisos, the son of Pandidn, king of Me- 
gara, who had amongst the hair of his head one peculiar lock of 
a purple color: an oracle had pronounced that his life and reign 
would never be in danger so long as he preserved thiy precious 
lock. The city would have remained inexpugnable, if Scylla, 
the daughter of Nisus, had not conceived a violent passion for 
Minés. While her father was asleep, she cut off the lock on 
which his safety hung, so that the Krétan king soon became vie- 
torious. Instead of performing his promise to carry Scylla away 
with him to Kréte, he cast her from the stern of his vessel into 
the sea :! both Scylla and Nisus were changed into birds. 

Androgeos, son of Minés having displayed such rare qualities 
as to vanquish all his competitors at the Panathenaic festival in 
Athens, was sent by Aigeus the Athenian king to contend against 
the bull of Marathén,—an enterprise in which he perished, and 
Minds made war upon Athens to avenge his death. He was for 
a long time unable to take the city: at length he prayed to his 
father Zeus to aid him in obtaining redress from the Athenians, 
and Zeus sent upon them pestilence and famine. In vain did 
they endeavor to avert these calamities by offering up as pro- 
pitiatory sacrifices the four daughters of Hyacinthus. Their 
sufferings still continued, and the oracle directed them to submit 
to any terms which Minds might exact. He required that they 
should send to Kréte.a tribute of seven youths and seven mai- 
dens, periodically, to be devoured by the Mindtaur,? — offered to 
him in a labyrinth constructed by Deedalus, including countless 
different passages, out of which no person could escape. 

Every ninth year this offering was to be despatched. The 
more common story was, that the youths and maidens thus des- 
tined to destruction were selected by lot— but the logographer 
Hellanikus said that Minéds came to Athens and chose them him- 
self.3 The third period for despatching the victims had arrived, 





1 Apollodér. iii. 15,8. See the Ciris of Virgil, a juvenile poem on the 
subject of this fable; also Hyginus, f. 198; Schol. Eurip. Hippol. 1200, 
Propertius (iii. 19,21) gives the features of the story with tolerable fidel 
ity ; Ovid takes considerable liberties with it (Metam. viii. 5-150). 

® Apollod6r. iii. 15, 8. 

* See, on the subject of Théscus and the Minotaur, Eckermann, Lehrbuch 


222 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


and Athens was plunged in the deepest affliction, when Théseus 
determined to devote himself as one of them, and either to ter- 
minate the sanguinary tribute or to perish. He prayed to Posei- 
dén for help, and the Delphian god assured him that Aphrodité 
would sustain and extricate him. On arriving at Knossus he 
was fortunate enough to captivate the affections of Ariadné, the 
daughter of Minés, who supplied him with a sword and a clue of 
thread. With the former he contrived to kill the Minétaur, the 
latter served to guide his footsteps in escaping from the labyrinth. 
Having accomplished this triumph, he left Kréte with his ship 
and companions unhurt, carrying off Ariandé, whom however he 
soon abandoned on the island of Naxos. On his way home to 
Athens, he stopped at Délos, where he offered a grateful sacrifice 
to Apollo for his escape, and danced along with the young men 
and maidens whom he had rescued from the Minétaur, a dance 
called the Geranus, imitated from the twists and convolutions of 
the Krétan labyrinth. It had been concerted with his father 
Zégeus, that if he succeeded in his enterprise against the Miné- 
taur, he should on his return hoist white sails in his ship in place 
of the black canvas which she habitually carried when employed 
on this mournful embassy. But Théseus forgot to make the 
change of sails; so that Aigeus, seeing the ship return with her 
equipment of mourning unaltered, was impressed with the sorrow- 
ful conviction that his son had perished, and cast himself into the 
sea. ‘The ship which made this voyage was preserved by the 
Athenians with careful solicitude, being constantly repaired with 
new timbers, down to the time of the Phalerian Démétrius: every 
year she was sent from Athens to Délos with a solemn sacrifice 
and specially-nominated envoys. The priest of Apollo decked 
her stern with garlands before she quitted the port, and during 
the time which elapsed until her return, the city was understood 
to abstain from all acts carrying with them public impurity, so 
that it was unlawful to put to death any person even under for- 
mal sentence by the dikastery. This accidental circumstance 





der Religions Geschichte und Mytholégie, vol. ii. ch. xiii. p. 133. He main-_ 
tains that the tribute of these human victims paid by Athens to Minds is an 
historical fact. Upon what this belief is grounded, I confesy I do not 
Bee. 


THESEUS AND THE MINOTAUR. 223 © 


becomes cspecially memorable, from its having postponed for 
thirty days the death of the lamented Socratés.! 

The legend respecting Théseus, and his heroic rescue of the 
seven noble youths and maidens from the jaws of the Mindtaur, 
was thus both commemorated and certified to the Athenian public, 
by the annual. holy ceremony and by the unquestioned identity 
of the vessel employed in it. There were indeed many varieties 
in the mode of narrating the incident; and some of the Attic 
logographers tried to rationalize the fable by transforming the 
Min6taur into a general or a powerful athlete, named Taurus, 
whom Théseus vanquished in Kréte.2 But this altered version 
never overbore the old fanciful character of the tale as maintain- 
ed by the poets. A great number of other religious ceremonies 
and customs, as well as several chapels or sacred enclosures in 
honor of different heroes, were connected with different acts and 
special ordinances of Théseus. To every Athénian who took 





1 Plato, Pheedon, c. 2,3; Xenoph. Memor. iv. 8. 2. Plato especially notic- 
ed tode dic Exra éxeivove, the seven youths and the seven maidens whom 
Théseus conveyed to Kréte and brought back safely: this number seems an 
old and constant feature in the legend, maintained by Sappho and Bacchy- 
lidés as well as by Euripidés (Here. Fur. 1318). See Servius ad Virgil 
/Eneid. vi. 21. 

* For the general narrative and its discrepancies, see Plutarch, Thés 
ce. 15-19; Diodér. iv. 60-62; Pausan. i. 17,3; Ovid, Epist. Ariadn. Thés 
104. - In that other portion of the work of Diodérus which relates more es- 
pecially to Kréte, and is borrowed from Kretan logographers and historians 
(v. 64-80), he mentions nothing at all respecting the war of Minés with 
Athens. 

In the drama of Euripidés called Théseus, the genuine story of the youths 
and maidens about to be offered as food to the Minétaur was introduced 
{Schol. ad Aristoph. Vesp. 312). 

Ariadné figures in the Odyssey along with Théseus: she is the daughter of 
Minés, carried off by Théseus from Kréte, and killed by Artemis in the way 
home: there is no allusion to Minétaur, or tribute, or self-devotion of Thé- 
seus (Odyss. xi. 324). This is probably the oldest and simplest form of the 
legend —one of the many amorous (compare Theognis, 1232) adventures 
of Théseus : the rest is added by post-Homeric poets. 

The respect of Aristotle for Minds induces him to adopt the hypothesis 
that the Athenian youths and maidens were not put to death in Kréte, but 
grew old in servitude (Aristot. Fragm. Borriaiwy Todcreia, p. 106. ed 
Neumann. of the Fragments of the treatise Ilep? IloAcrecév. Plutarch, Quest 
Greec. p. 298). 


~ 224 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


part in the festivals of the Oschophoria, the Pyanepsia, or the 
Kybernésia, the name of this great hero was familiar, and the 
motives for offering to him solemn worship at his own special 
festival of the Théseia, became evident and impressive. 

The same Athenian legends which ennobled and decorated the 
character of Théseus, painted in repulsive colors the attributes 
of Minds; and the traits of the old Homeric comrade of Zeus 
were buried under those of the conqueror and oppressor of 
Athens. His history like that of the other legendary personages 
of Greece, consists almost entirely of a string of family romances 
and tragedies. His son Katreus, father of Aéropé, wife of Atreus, 
was apprized by an oracle that he would perish by the hand of 
one of his own children: he accordingly sent them out of the 
island, and Althzmenés, his son, established himself in Rhodes. 
Katreus having become old, and fancying that he had outlived 
the warning of the oracle, went over to Rhodes to see Altha- 
menés. In an accidental dispute which arose between his atten- 
dants and the islanders, Althemenés inadvertently took part and 
slew his father without knowing him. Glaukus, the youngest 
son of Minds, pursuing a mouse, fell into a reservoir of honey and 
was drowned. No one knew what had become of him,and bis 
father was inconsolable; at length the Argeian Polyeidus, a 
prophet wonderfully endowed by the gods, both discovered the 
boy and restored him to life, to the exceeding joy of Mindés.1 

The latter at last found his death in an eager attempt to over- 
take and punish Dedalus. This great artist, the eponymous 
hero of the Attic gens or déme called the Dedalide, and the 
descendant of Erechtheus through Métion, had been tried at the 
tribunal of Areiopagus and banished for killing his nephew 
Talos, whose rapidly improving skill excited his envy.2_ He took 
refuge in Kréte, where he acquired the confidence of Minds, and 
was employed (as has been already mentioned) in constructing 
the labyrinth; subsequently however he fell under the displeasure 
of Minds, and was confined as a close prisoner in the inextricable 
windings of his own edifice. His unrivalled skill and rescuree 
however did not forsake him. He manufactured wings both for 





} Apollodér. iii. cap. 2-3. 
* Pherekyd. Fragm. 105; Hellanik. Fragm. 82 (Didot); Pausan. vii. 4,5 


i Ble i 


DEATH OF MINOS IN SICILY. 225 


himself and for his son Ikarus, with which they flew over the 
sea: the father arrived safely in Sicily at Kamikus, the residence 
of the Sikanian king Kokalus, but the son, disdaining paternal 
example and admonition, flew so high that his wings were melted 
by the sun and he fell into the sea, which from him was called 
the Ikarian sea. 

Deedalus remained for some time in Sicily, leaving in various 
parts of the island many prodigious evidences of mechanical and 
architectural skill.2 At length Minds bent upon regaining posses- 
sion of his person, undertook an expedition against Kokalus with 
a numerous fleet and army. Kokalus affecting readiness to de- 
liver up the fugitive, and receiving Minds with apparent friend- 
ship, ordered a bath to be prepared for him by his three daugh 
ters, who, eager to protect Dedalus at any price, drowned the 
Krétan king in the bath with hot water.3 Many of the Krétans 
who had accompanied him remained in Sicily and founded the 
town of Minoa, which they denominated after him. But not long 
afterwards Zeus roused all the inhabitants of Kréte (except the 
towns of Polichna and Presus) to undertake with one accord an 
expedition against Kamikus for the purpose of avenging the 
death of Minds. ‘They besieged Kamikus in vain for five years, 
until at last famine compelled them to return. On their way 
along the coast of Italy, in the Gulf of Tarentum, a terrible 
storm destroyed their fleet and obliged them to settle perma- 
nently in the country: they founded Hyria with other cities, and 
became Messapian Iapygians. Other settlers, for the most part 
Greeks, immigrated into Kréte to the spots which this movement 





1 Diodor. iv. 79; Ovid, Metamorph. viii. 181. Both Ephorus and Philis- 
tus mentioned the coming of Dedalus to Kokalus in Sicily (Ephor. Fr. 99 ; 
Philist. Fragm. 1, Didot): probably Antiochus noticed it also (Diodor. xii. 
71). Kokalus was the point of commencement for the Sicilian historians. 

? Diodor. iv. 80. 

3 Pausan. vii. 4, 5; Schol. Pindar. Nem. iv. 95; Hygin. fab. 44; Conon 
Narr. 25; Ovid. Ibis, 291.— 


“Vel tua maturet, sicut Minoia fata, 
Per caput infuse feryidus humor aque.” 


This story formed the subject of a lost drama of Sophoklés, Kayixcou on 
Mivoc; it was also told by Kallimachus, év Airiovc, as well as by Philosse 
vhanus (Schol. Iliad, ii. 145). 

VOL. 1. 10* 1500. 


296 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


had left vacant, and in the second generation after Minés occur. 
red the Trojan war. The departed Minds was exceedingly of: 
fended with the Krétans for cooperating in avenging the injury 
to Menelaus, since the Greeks generally had lent no aid to the 
Krétans in their expedition against the town of Kamikus. He 
sent upon Kréte, after the return of Idomeneus from Troy, such 
terrible visitations of famine and pestilence, that the population 
again died out or expatriated, and was again renovated by fresh 
immigrations. The intolerable suffering! thus brought upon the 
Krétans by the anger of Minds, for having codperated in the 
general Grecian aid to Menelaus, was urged by them to the 
Greeks as the reason why they could take no part in resisting 
the invasion of Xerxés; and it is even pretended that they were 
advised and encouraged to adopt this ground of excuse by the 
Delphian oracle.2 

Such is the Minés of the poets and logographers, with his 
legendary and romantic attributes: the familiar comrade of the 
great Zeus, — the judge among the dead in Hadés,— the husband 
of Pasiphaé, daughter of the god Hélios,— the father of the god- 
dess Ariadné, as well as of Androgeos, who perishes and is wor- 
shipped at Athens,’ and of the boy Glaukus, who is miraculously 
restored to life by a prophet,—the person beloved by Seylla, and 
the amorous pursuer of the nymph or goddess Britomartis,s— 





' This curious and very characteristic narrative is given by Herodot. vii 
169-171. 

? Heredot. vii. 169. The answer ascribed to the Delphian oracle, on the 
question being put by the Krétan envoys whether it would be better for them 
to aid the Greeks against Xerxés or not, is higaly emphatic and poetical: 
"Q varot, eripéugecde boa tyiv éx Tov Meveréw Tiyswpnuatov Mivog éxeprpe 
unviov daxptuara, Ste ol piv od EvvetexpHgavro abro Tov év Kapixw Savarov 
yevopevor, tyeic dé Keivorot Thy éx Lxapryc dpraxVeicav bx’ avdpd¢ Bappa- 
pov yuvaixa, 

If such an answer was ever returned at cll, I cannot but think that it 
must have been from some oracle in Kréte itself, not from Delphi. The 
Delphian oracle could never have so far forgotten its obligations to the 
general cause of Greece, at that critical moment, which involved moreover 
the safety of all its own treasures, as to deter the Krétans from giving assist- 
uce. 

* Hesiod, Theogon. 949; Pausan. i. 1, 4. 

* Kallimach. Hymn. ad Dian. 189. Strabo (x. p. 476) dwells also upon 


CHARACTER OF MINOS IN LEGEND. 927 


the proprietor of the Labyrinth and of the Minotaur, and the 
exacter of a periodical tribute of youths and maidens from Athens 
as food for this monster, — lastly, the follower of the fugitive 
artist Dedalus to Kamikus, and the victim of the three ill-dis 
posed daughters of Kokalus in a bath. With this strongly- 
marked portrait, the Minds of Thucydidés and Aristotle has 
searcely anything in common except the name. He is the first 
to acquire Zhalassokraty, or command of the Augean sea: he ex- 
pels the Karian inhabitants from the Cyclades islands, and sends 
thither fresh colonists under his own sons ; he puts down piracy, 
in order that he may receive his tribute regularly; lastly, he at- 
tempts to conquer Sicily, but fails in the enterprise and perishes.! 
Here we have conjectures, derived from the analogy of the 
Athenian maritime empire in the historical times, substituted in 
place of the fabulous incidents, and attached to the name of 
Minos. 

In the fable, a tribute of seven youths and seven maidens is 
paid to him periodically by the Athenians; in the historicized 
narrative this character of a tribute-collector is preserved, but 
the tribute is money collected from dependent islands ;2 and Aris- 





the strange contradiction of the legends concerning Minds: I agree with 
Hoeckh (Kreta, ii. p. 93) that dacyéAoyo¢ in this passage refers to the tribute 
exacted from Athens for the Mindtaur. 

1 Thuycd. i. 4. Mivwg yap, radairatoc dv axog touev, vavtiKdv-éxthoaTo, 
Kai Tho viv ‘EAAnviKie Saddocons éxi mAciorov éxpatyoe, kai Tov KukAddwv 
vaowv npsé te Kal olxiotng aito¢ TOv TAeioTwr éyéveto, Kdpac é&edacac Kal 
tode éavtod waidag hyepovag éyxataotHoag* TO Te AyoTLKdy, WE eikd¢, Kady- 
pet &x rig Sadaoone, é¢’ dcov Hdvvato, Tov Tag mpooddv¢e pa2Aov lévat abr. 
See also c. 8. 

Aristot. Polit. ii. 7,2, Aoxet & 7 vicog Kal mpde tiv apyny Thy “EAAnvixhy 
megukévat kai KetoSat KaA@E......+.+ 610 Kai Tiy tH Yahacone dpyhv Karte- 
oxev 6 Mivwc, kai tae vaoove Tac piv éxetpwaaro, Tac dé GKice* TéAog J Ext 
Véwevog tH DiKedig tov Biov éredebryoev éxei wept Kaytxov. 

Ephorus (ap. Skymn. Chi. 542) repeated the same statement: he men 
tioned also the autochthonous king Krés. 

? It is curious that Herodotus expressly denies this, and in language which 
shows that he had made special inquiries about it: he says that the Karians 
or Leleges in the islands (who were, according to Thucydidés, expelled by 
Minds) paid no tribute to Minés, but manned his navy, i. e. they stood to 
Minés much in the same relation as Chios and Lesbos stood to Athens 
(Herodot. i. 171). One may trace here the influence of those discussions 


228 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


totle points out to us how conveniently Kréte is situated to ex- 
ercise empire over the AXgwan. The expedition against Kami 
kus, instead of being directed to the recovery of the fugitive 
Deedalus, is an attempt on the part of the great thalassokrat to 
conquer Sicily. Herodotus gives us generally the same view of 
the character of Minds as a great maritime king, but his notice 
of the expedition against Kamicus includes the mention of De- 
dalus as the intended object of it.1 Ephorus, while he described 
Minos as a commanding and comprehensive lawgiver imposing 
his commands under the sanction of Zeus, represented him as 
the imitator of an earlier lawgiver named Rhadamanthus, and 
also as an immigrant into Kréte from the olic Mount Ida, along 
with the priests or sacred companions of Zeus called the Idei 
Dactyli. Aristotle too points him out as the author of the Sys- 
sitia, or public meals common in Kréte as well as at Sparta,— 
other divergences in a new direction from the spirit of the old 
fables.? 

The contradictory attributes ascribed to Minds, together with 
the perplexities experienced by those who wished to introduce a 
regular chronological arrangement into these legendary events, 
has led both in ancient and in modern times to the supposition of 
two kings named Minds, one the grandson of the other, — Minds 
I, the son of Zeus, lawgiver and judge, — Minds IL., the thalas- 
sokrat, — a gratuitous conjecture, which, without solving the prob- 
lem required, only adds one to the numerous artifices employed 
for imparting the semblance of history to the disparate matter of 
legend. The Krétans were at all times, from Homer downward, 
expert and practised seamen. But that they were ever united 





which must have been prevalent at that time respecting the maritime empire 
of Athens. ‘ 

’ Herodot. vii. 170. Aéyeras yap Mive xara Carnot Aadadrov axtkopevor 
é¢ Xexavinv, Thy viv Linadrinv Kadovpévyv, dxoVaveiv Biaiy Savard, ’Ava 
dé xpovov Kpijrac, Seod ogi éxorpdivovros, ete. _ 

* Aristot. Polit. ii. 7,1; vii. 9,2. Ephorus, Fragm. 63, 64, 65. He set 
aside altogether the Homeric genealogy of Minés, which makes him brother 
of Rhadamanthus and born in Kréte. 

Strabo, in pointing out the many contradictions respecting Minds, re 
marks, "Eors 3? xa GAAoc Adyoc oby duodoyotpevoc, Tov piv Sévov The vicow 
rov Miva Aeyévtwr, tov dé éxtyOpiov. By the former he doubtless means 
Ephorus, though he has not here specified him (x. p. 477). 


CHARACTER OF MINOS IN LEGEND. 229 


under one government, or ever exercised maritime dominion in 
the Aigean is a fact which we are neither able to affirm nor to 
deny. The Odyssey, in so far as it justifies any inference at all, 
points against such a supposition, since it recognizes a great di- 
versity both of inhabitants and of languages in the island, and 
designates Minds as king specially of Knéssus: it refutes still 
more positively the idea that Mitnés put down piracy, which the 
Homeric Krétans as well as others continue to practise without 
acruple. 

Herodotus, though he in some places speaks of Minds as a per- 
son historically cognizable, yet in one passage severs him point- 
edly from the generation of man. The Samian despot “ Poly- 
kratés (he tells us) was the first person who aspired to nautical 
dominion, excepting Minés of Knéssus, and others before him 
(if any such there ever were) who may have ruled the sea; but 
Polykratés is the first of that which is called the generation of 
man who aspired with much chance of success to govern Iénia 
and the islands of the Augean.”! Here we find it manifestly in- 
timated that Minds did not belong to the generation of man, and 
the tale given by the historian respecting the tremendous calam- 
ities which the wrath of the departed Minds inflicted on Kréte 
confirms the impression. The king of Knéssus is a god ora 
hero, but not a man; he belongs to legend, not to history. He 
is the son as well as the familiar companion of Zeus ;- he mar- 
ries the daughter of Hélios, and Ariadné is numbered among his 
offspring. ‘To this superhuman person are ascribed the oldest 
and most revered institutions of the island, religious and politi- 
cal, together with a period of supposed ante-historical dominion. 
That there is much of Krétan religious ideas and practice em~ 
bodied in the fables concerning Minds can hardly be doubted : 
nor is it improbable that the tale of the youths and maidens sent 





1 Herodot. iii. 122. TloAvaparne yap éott xpGroc tov jueic iduev ‘EAAG- 
vav, O¢ Yaracooxparéew éixevondyn, map?s Mivwéc te Tod Kvwociov, kai e} On 
tu GdAAog tporepoc TobTov Hpke tie Yakatrync: THo b& dvopuarniagg 
Acyomévne yevéng UWodvkparne éoti rpdrog tAnidag woAAde Exar “loving 
te wal vapour apse. 

The expression exactly corresponds to that of Pausan’as, ix. 5, 1, éx? roy 
cadovyévor ‘Hpdwy, for the age preceding the dvipannir yevéy ; also viii. 2 
1, é¢ ra dvarépw Tod dvdpdrwyr yévouc. 


230° HISTORY OF GREECE. 


from Athens may be based in some expiatory offerings ren: 
dered to a Krétan divinity. The orgiastic worship of Zeus, sol- | 
emnized by the armed priests with impassioned motions and vio-. 
lent excitement, was of ancient date in that island, as well as the: 
connection with the worship of Apollo both at Delphi and at 
Délos. To analyze the fables and to elicit from them any trust- 
worthy particular facts, appears to me a fruitless attempt. The 
religious recollections, the romantic invention, and the items of 
matter of fact, if any such there be, must forever remain indis- 
solubly amalgamated as the poet originally blended them, for the 
amusement or edification of his auditors. Hoeckh, in his in- 
structive and learned collection of facts respecting ancient Kréte, 
construes the mythical genealogy of Minds to denote a combina- 
tion of the orgiastic worship of Zeus, indigenous among the 
Eteokrétes, with the worship of the moon imported from Phe- 
nicia, and signified by the names Europé, Pasiphaé, and Ariad- 
né.1 ‘This is specious as a conjecture, but I do not venture to 
speak of it in terms of greater confidence. 

From the connection of religious worship and legendary tales 
between Kréte and various parts of Asia Minor, —the Tréad, 
the coast of Milétus and Lykia, especially between Mount Ida 
in Kréte and Mount Ida in A®élis, — it seems reasonable to infer 
an ethnographical kindred or relationship between the inhabitants 
anterior to the period of Hellenic occupation. The tales of Kré- 
tan settlement at Minoa and Engyion on the south-western coast 
of Sicily, and in Iapygia on the Gulf of Tarentum, conduct us. 
to asimilar presumption, though the want of evidence forbids our 
tracing it farther. In the time of Herodotus, the Eteokrétes, or. 
aboriginal inhabitants of the island, were confined to Polichna 
and Presus; but in earlier times, prior to the encroachments of 
the Hellénes, they had occupied the larger portion, if not the. 
whole of the island. Minds was originally their hero, subse- 
quently adopted by the immigrant Hellénes, — at least Herodotus 
considers him as barbarian, not Hellenic.? 





? Hoeckh, Kreta, vol. ii. pp. 56-67. K. O. Miiller also (Dorier. ii. 2, 14) 
puts a religious interpretation upon these Kreto-Attic legends, brt he ex- 
plains them in a manner totally different from Hoeckh. 

* Herodct. i. 173 


ne 


— 


ARGONAUTIC EXPEDITION. 231 


CHAPTER XIII. 


ARGONAUTIC EXPEDITION. 


Tue ship Argd was the theme of many songs during the old- 
est periods of the Grecian epic, even earlier than the Odyssey. 
The king Aétés, from whom she is departing, the hero Jasdn, 
who commands her, and the goddess Héré, who watches over 
him, enabling the Argé to traverse distances and to escape dan- 
gers which no ship had ever before encountered, are all circum- 
stances briefly glanced at by Odysseus in his narrative to Alki- 
nous. Moreover, Eunéus, the son of Jasén and Hypsipylé, 
governs Lemnos during the siege of Troy by Agamemnén, and 
carries on a friendly traffic with the Grecian camp, purchasing 
from them their Trojan prisoners.! 

The legend of Halus in Achaia Phthidtis, respecting the re- 
ligious solemnities connected with the family of Athamas and 
Phryxus (related in a previous chapter), is also interwoven with 
the voyage of the Argonauts ; and both the legend and the solemni- 
ties seem evidently of great antiquity. We know further, that the 
adventures of the Argé were narrated not only by Hesiod and in 
the Hesiodic poems, but also by Eumélus and the author of the 
Naupactian verses —by the latter seemingly at considerable 
length.2 But these poems are unfortunately lost, nor have we 





1 Odyss. xii. 69.— 


Oin 6? Keivn ye mapémAet movToropos vIzve, 

*Apy® maciédovea, nap’ Aijftao rAéovea : 

Kai vi xe ray vd’ Gxa Barev peyddAag roti rétpag, 
*AAN “Hon rapéreprev, ere? dirog Hev Ijowv. 


See also Iliad, vii. 470. 

2 See Hesiod, Fragm. Catalog. Fr. 6. p. 33, Diintz.; Eoiai, Frag. 36. p, 
39; Frag. 72. p.47. Compare Schol. ad Apollon. Rhod. i. 45; ii. 178-297, 
1195 ; iv. 254-284. Other poetical sources — 

The old epic poem Lgimius, Frag. 5. p. 57, Diintz. 


232 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


any means of determining what the original story was; for the 
narrative, as we have it, borrowed from later sources, is enlarged 
by local tales from the subsequent Greek colonies — Kyzikus, 
Herakléia, Sinopé, and others. 

Jason, commanded by Pelias to depart in quest of the golden 
fleece belonging to the speaking ram which had carried away 
Phryxus and Hellé, was encouraged by the oracle to invite the 
noblest youth of Greece to his aid, and fifty of the most distin 
guished amongst them obeyed the call. Héraklés, Théseus, 
Telamén and Péleus, Kastor and Pollux, Idas and Lynkeus— 
Zétés and Kalais, the winged sons of Boreas — Meleager, Am- 
phiaraus, Képheus, Laertés, Autolykus, Mencetius, Aktor, Ergi- 
nus, Euphémus, Ankzeus, Poeas, Periklymenus, Augeas, Eurytus, 
Admétus, Akastus, Keneus, Euryalus, Péneleés and Léitus, 
Askalaphus and Jalmenus, were among them. Argus the son 
of Phryxus, directed by the promptings of Athéné, built the ship, 
inserting in the prow a piece of timber from the celebrated oak 
of Dodona, which was endued with the faculty of speech :! Ti- 
phys was the steersman, Idmén the son of Apollo and Mopsus 





Kinethén in the Herakléia touched upon the death of Hylas near Kius in 
Mysia (Schol. Apollén. Rhod. i. 1357). 

The epic poem Naupactia, Frag. 1 to 6, Diintz. p, 61. 

Eumélus, Frag. 2, 8, 5, p. 65, Diintz. 

Epimenidés, the Krétan prophet and poet, composed a poem in 6500 lines, 
*Apyovc vaurnyiav Te, kat "lacovoc el¢ KéAxoug drxorAociv (Diogen. Laér. i. 
10, 5), which is noticed more than once in the Scholia on Apollénius, on 
subjects connected with the poem (ii. 1125; iii. 42). See Mimnerm. Frag. 
10, Schneidewin, p. 15. : 

Antimachus, in his poem Lydé, touched upon the Argonautic expedition, 
and has been partially copied by Apollénius Rhod. (Schol. Ap. Rh. i. 1290; 
ii. 296: iii. 410; iv. 1153). 

The logographers Pherekydés and Hekatseus seem to have related the ex- 
pedition at considerable length. 

The Bibliothek der alten Literatur und Kunst (G6ttingen, 1786, 2lis 
Stiick, p. 61) contains an instructive Dissertation by Groddeck, Ueber die 
Argonautika, a summary of the various authorities respecting this expedi- 
tion. 

? Apollon. Rhod. i. 525; iv. 580, Apollodor. i. 9,16. Valerius Flaccus 
(i. 300) softens down the speech of the ship Argo into a dream of Jas6n. 
Alexander Polyhistor explained what wood was used (Plin. H. N. xii 
22). 


ARGONAUTS AT LEMNOS. 2388 


accompanied them as prophets, while Orpheus came to amuse 
their weariness and reconcile tLeir quarrels with his harp.1 
First they touched at the island of Lémnos, in which at that 
time there were no men; for the women, infuriated by jealousy 
and ill-treatment, had put to death their fathers, husbands and 
brothers. The Argonauts, after some difficulty, were received with 
friendship, and even admitted into the greatest intimacy. They 
staid some months, and the subsequent population of the island was 





1 Apollonius Rhodius, Apollodérus, Valerius Flaccus, the Orphic Argonau- 
tica, and Hyginus, have all given Catalogues of the Argonautic heroes (there 
was one also in the lost tragedy called Ajuviae of Sophoklés, see Welcker 
Gr. Trag. i. 327): the discrepancies among them are numerous and _ irreconcil 
able. Burmann, in the Catalogus Argonautarum, prefixed to his edition of 
Valerius Flaccus, has discussed them copiously. I transcribe one or two of 
the remarks of this conscientious and laborious critic, out of many ofa simi- 
lar tenor, on the impracticability of a fabulous chronology. Immediately 
before the first article, Acastus —“ Neque enim in etatibus Argonautarum 
ullam rationem temporum constare, neque in stirpe et stemmate deducendd 
ordinem ipsum nature congruere videbam. Nam et huic militiz adscribi 
videbam Heroas, qui per nature leges et ordinem fati eo usque vitam ex- 
trahere non potuére, ut aliis ab hac expeditione remotis Heroum militiis no- 
mina dedisse narrari deberent a Poetis et Mythologis. In idem etiam tempus 
avos et Nepotes conjici, consanguineos «tate longe inferiores prioribus ut 
gquales adjungi, concoquere vix posse videtur.” — Art. Anceus : “ Scio objici 
posse, si seriem illam majorem respiciamus, hunc Anceum simul cum proa 
vo suo Talao in eandem profectum fuisse expeditionem. Sed similia exem- 
pla in aliis occurrent, et in fabulis rationem temporum non semper accura- 
tam licet deducere.”— Art. Jasén: “ Herculi enim jam provecta xtate ad 
hesit Theseus juvenis, et in Amazonia expeditione socius fuit, interfuit huic 
expeditioni, venatui apri Calydonii, et rapuit Helenam, que circa Trojanum 
bellum maxime floruit: que omnia si Theseus tot temporum intervallis 
distincta egit, secula duo vel tria vixisse debuit. Certe Jason Hypsipylem 
neptem Ariadnes, nec videre, nee Lemni cognoscere potuit.”— Art. Melea- 
ger: “Unum est quod alicui longum ordinem majorum recensenti scrupu- 
lum moyvere possit: nimis longum intervallum inter olam et Meleagrum 
intercedere, ut potuerit interfuisse huic expeditioni: cum nonus fere numer- 
etur ab AXolo, et plurimi ut Jason, Argus, et alii tertid tantum ab AZolo 
g2neratione distent. Sed spe jam notayimus, frustra temporum concor- 
dam in fabulis queeri.” 

Read also the articles Castér and Pollux, Nestér Péleus, Staphylus, ete. 

We may stand excused for keeping clear of a chronology which is fertile 
only in difficulties, and ends in nothing but ilk :sions. 


234 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


the fruit of their visit. Hypsipylé, the queen of the ve 
to Jasén two sons.! 

They then proceeded onward along the coast of Thrace, up the 
Hellespont, to the southern coast of the Propontis, inhabited by 
the Doliones and their king Kyzikus. Here they were kindly 
entertained, but after their departure were driven back to the 
same spot by a storm; and as they landed in the dark, the inhabi- 
tants did not know them. A battle took place, in which the 
chief, Kyzikus, was killed by Jasén; whereby much grief was 
occasioned as soon as the real facts became known. After Kyzi- 
kus had been interred with every demonstration of mourning and 
solemnity, the Argonauts proceeded along the coast of Mysia.2 
In this part of the voyage they left Héraklés behind. © For Hylas, 
his favorite youthful companion, had been stolen away by the 
nymphs of a fountain, and Héraklés, wandering about in search 
of him, neglected to return. At last he sorrowfully retired, ex- 
acting hostages from the inhabitants of the neighboring town of 
Kius that they would persist in the search.4 





1 Apollodor. i. 9, 17 ; Apollén. Rhod. i, 609-915 ; Herodot. iv. 145. Theocri- 
tus (Idyll. xiii. 29) omits all mention of Lémnos, and represents the Argé 
as arriving on the third day from Idlkos at the Hellespont. Diodérus (iv 
t1) also leaves out Lémnos. 

2 Apollon. Rhod. 940-1020; Apollodor. i. 9, 18 

3 Apollodér. i. 9,19. This was the religious legend, explanatory of a cere 
mony performed for many centuries by the people of ge they ran round 
she lake Askanias shouting and clamoring for Hylas — “ut littus Hyla, Hyla 
¢mne sonaret.” (Virgil, Eclog.)........... “in cujus memoriam adhue 
solemni cursatione lacum populus circuit et Hylam voce clamat.” Solinus, 
ce. 42. 

There is endless discrepancy as to the concern of Héraklés with the 
Argonautic expedition. A story is alluded to in Aristotle (Politic. iii. 9) 
that the ship Argé herself refused to take him on board, because he was so 
much superior in stature and power to all the other heroes — od ydp é3éAew 
abrov dyeww Tv ’Apy® weTa tOv GAAwy, Oe drepBaAAovta 70Ad TOY TAWTAPOY. 
This was the story of Pherekydés (Fr. 67, Didot) as well as ¢f Antimachus 
(Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 1290): itis probably a very ancient portion of the 
legend, inasmuch as it ascribes to the ship sentient powers, in consonance 
with her other miraculous properties. The etymology of Aphete in Thes 
saly was connected with the tale of Héraklés having there been put on shore 
from the Argé (Herodot. vii. 193): Ephorus said that he staid away volun- 
tarily from fondness for Omphalé (Frag. 9, Didot). The old epic poet 


PHINEUS AND THE HARPIES. 235 


They next stopped in the country of the Bebrykians, where 
the boxing contest took place between the king Amykus and the 
Argonaut Pollux:! they then proceeded onward to Bithynia, 
the residence of the blind prophet Phineus. His blindness had 
been inflicted by Poseidén as a punishment for having communi- 
cated to Phryxus the way to Kolchis. The choice had been al- 
lowed to him between death and blindness, and he had preferred 
the latter.2 He was also tormented by the harpies, winged mon- 
sters who came down from the clouds whenever his table was 
set, snatched the food from his lips and imparted to it a foul 
and unapproachable odor. In the midst of this misery, he hail- 
ed the Argonauts as his deliverers—his prophetic powers having 
enabled him to foresee their coming. The meal being prepared 
for him, the harpies approached as usual, but Zétés and Kalais, 
the winged sons of Boreas, drove them away and pursued them. 
They put forth all their speed, and prayed to Zeus to be enabled 
to overtake the monsters; when Hermés appeared and directed 
them to desist, the harpies being forbidden further to molest 
Phineus,’ and retiring again to their native cavern in Kréte.4 

Phineus, grateful for the relief afforded to him by the Argo- 
nauts, forewarned them of the dangers of their voyage and of the 
precautions necessary for their safety; and through his suggestions 
they were enabled to pass through the terrific rocks called Sym- 
plégades. These were two rocks which alternately opened and 





Kineethon said that Héraklés had placed the Kian hostages at Trachin, and 
that the Kians ever afterwards maintained a respectful correspondence with 
that place (Schol. Ap. Rh.i. 1357). This is the explanatory legend con- 
nected with some existing custom, which we are unable further to unravel. 

1 See above, chap. viii. p. 169. 

* Such was the old narrative of the Hesiodic Catalogue and Eoiai. See 
Schol. Apollén. Rhod. ii. 181-296. 

3 This again was the old Hesiodic story (Sckol. Apoll. Rhod. ii. 296), — 

"Ev? oly etycodov Aivyiy typipédorte. 

Apollodérus (i. 9, 21), Apollonius (178-300), and Valerius Flace. \iv. 428- 
530) agree in most of the circumstances. 

4 Such was the fate of the harpies as given in the old Naupaktian Verses 
(See Fragm. Ep. Gree. Diintzer, Naupakt. Fr. 2. p. 61). 

The adventure of the Argonauts with Phineus is given by Diodérus in a 
manner totally different (Diod6r. iv. 44): he seems to follow Dionysius of 
Mityléné (see Schol. Apolién. Rhod. ii. 207). 


236 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


shut, with a swift and violent collision, so that it was difficult even 
for a bird to fly through during the short interval. When the 
Argé arrived at the dangerous spot, Euphémus let loose a dove. 
which flew through and just escaped with the loss of a few feath. 
ers of her tail. This was a signal to the Argonauts, according 
to the prediction of Phineus, that they might attempt the pas- 
sage with confidence. Accordingly they rowed with all their 
might, and passed safely through: the closing rocks, held for 
a moment asunder by the powerful arms of Athéné, just crushed 
the ornaments at the stern of their vessel. It had been decreed 
by the gods, that so soon as any ship once got through, the pas- 
sage should forever afterwards be safe and easy to all. ‘The rocks 
became fixed in their separate places, and never again closed.1 

After again halting on the coast of the Maryandinians, where 
their steersman Tiphys died, as well as in the country of the 
Amazons, and after picking up the sons of Phryxus, who had 
been cast away by Poseidén in their attempt to return from Kol- 
chis to Greece, they arrived in safety at the river Phasis and the 
residence of Aétes. In passing by Mount Caucasus, they saw 
the eagle which gnawed the liver of Prométheus nailed to the 
rock, and heard the groans of the sufferer himself. The sons of 
Phryxus were cordially welcomed by their mother Chalciopé.* 
Application was made to A&étés, that he would grant to the Ar- 
gonauts, heroes of divine parentage and sent forth by the man- 
date of the gods, possession of the golden fleece: their aid in 
return was proffered to him against any or all of his enemies. 
But the king was wroth, and peremptorily refused, except upon 
conditions which seemed impracticable. Héphestos had given 
him two ferocious and untamable bulls, with brazen feet, which 
breathed fire from their nostrils: Jasén was invited, as a proof 
both of his illustrious descent and of the sanction of the gods to 
his voyage, to harness these animals to the yoke, so as to plough 
a large field and sow it with dragon’s teeth.4 Perilous as the 
condition was, each one of the heroes volunteered to make the 





1 Apollodér. i. 9, 22. Apollén. Rhod. ii. 310-615. 
2 Apollodor. i. 9, 23. Apollén. Rhod. ii. 850-1257. 
3 Apollén. Rhod. iii. $20-385. 

* Apollon. Rhod. iii. 410.. Apollodér. i, 9, 28. 


RETURN OF THE ARGONAUTS. 237 


attempt. Idmdén especially encouraged Jason to undertake it,). 
and the goddesses Héré and Aphrodité made straight the way 
for him.2. Médea, the daughter of Alétés and Eidyia, having 
seen the youthful hero in his interview with her father, had con- 
ceived towards him a passion which disposed her to employ every 
means for his salvation and success. She had received from 
Hekaté preéminent magical powers, and she prepared for Jasén 
the powerful Prometheian unguent, extracted froman herb which 
had grown where the blood of Prométheus dropped. The body 
of Jasén having been thus pre-medicated, became invulnerable? 
either by fire or by warlike weapons. He undertook the enter- 
prise, yoked the bulls without suffering injury, and ploughed the 
field: when he had sown the dragon’s teeth, armed men sprung 
out of the furrows. But he had been forewarned by Médea to 
cast a vast rock into the midst of them, upon which they began 
to fight with each other, so that he was easily enabled to subdue 
them all.4 

The task prescribed had thus been triumphantly performed. 
Yet Aétés not only refused to hand over the golden fleece, but 
even took measures for secretly destroying the Argonauts and 
burning their vessel. He designed to murder them during the 
uight after a festal banquet; but Aphrodité, watchful for the 
safety of Jasén,> inspired the Kolchian king at the critical mo- 
ment with an irresistible inclination for his nuptial bed. While 
he slept, the wise Idmén counselled the Argonauts to make their 
escape, and Médea agreed to accompany them. She lulled to 
sleep by a magic potion the dragon who guarded the golden fleece, 





1 This was the story of the Naupaktian Verses (Schol. Apollén. Rhod. 
iii. 515-525): Apollonius and others altered it. Idmén, according to them, 
died in the voyage before the arrival at Kolchis. 

2 Apollén. Rhod. iii. 50-290. Valer. Flace. vi. 440-480, Hygin. fab. 22. 

3 Apollén. Rhod. iii. 835. Apollodér. i. 9, 23. Valer. Flacc. vii. 356 
Ovid, Epist. xii. 15. 

“ Isset anhelatos non praemedicatus in ignes 
Immemor sonides, oraque adunca boum.” 

* Apollén. Rhod. iii. 1230-1400. 

5 The Naupaktian Verses stated this (see the Fragm. 6, ed. Dintzer, p. 
61), ap. Schol. Apollén. Rhod. iv. 59-86). 

® Such was the story of the Naupaktian Verses (See Fragm. 6. p 61 
Dinizer ap. Schol. Apollon. Rhod. iv. 59, 86, 87). 


238 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


placed that much-desired prize on board the vessel, aud accom 
panied Jas6n with his companions in their flight, carrying along 
with her the young Apsyrtus, her brother.! 

J£étés, profoundly exasperated at the flight of the Avemaame 
with his daughter, assembled his forces forthwith, and put to sea 
in pursuit of them. So energetic were his efforts that he shortly 
overtook the retreating vessel,when the Argonauts again owed 
their safety to the stratagem of Médea. She killed her brother 
Apsyrtus, cut his body in pieces and strewed the limbs round 
about in the sea. /&étés on reaching the spot found these sorrow- 
ful traces of his murdered son; but while he tarried to collect the 
scattered fragments, and bestow upon the body an honorable in- 
terment, the Argonauts escaped.? The spot on which the unfor- 
tunate Apsyrtus was cut up received the name of Tomi. This 
fratricide of Médea, however, so deeply provoked the indignation 
of Zeus, that he condemned the Argé and her crew to a trying 





1 Apollodér. i. 9, 23. Apollén. Rhod. iv. 220. 

Pherekydés said that Jas6n killed the dragon (Fr. 74, Did.). 

2 This is the story of Apolloddérus (i. 9, 24), who seems to follow Phere- 
kydés (Fr. 73, Didot). Apollénius (iv. 225-480) and Valerius Flaccus (viii. 
262 seq.) give totally different circumstances respecting the death of Apsyr- 
tus ; but the narrative of Pherekydés seems the oldest : so revolting a story 
as that of the cutting up of the little boy cannot have been imagined in later 
times. ; 

Sophoklés composed two tragedies on the adventures of Jasén and Médea, 
both lost — the KoAyide¢ and the Zxi¥ar. In the former he represented the 
murder of the child Apsyrtus as having taken place in the house of Avétés: 
in the latter he introduced the mitigating circumstance, that Apsyrtus was 
the son of Aétés by a different mother from Médea (Schol. Apollén Rhod. 
iy. 223). 

3 Apollodér. i. 9, 24, Tov rérov xpoonyéoeves T4uorve. Ovid. Trist. iii. 9. 
The story that Apsyrtus was cut in pieces, is the etymological legend expla- 
natory of the name Tomi. 

There was however a place called Apsarus, on the southern coast of the 
Euxine, west of Trapezus, where the tomb of Apsyrtus was shown, and 
where it was affirmed that he had been put to death. He was the eponymus 
of the town, which was said to have been once called Apsyrtus, and only 
corrupted by a barbarian pronunciation (Arrian. Periplus, Euxin. p. 6; 
Geogr. Min. v. 1}. Compare Procop. Bell. Goth. iv. 2. 

Strabo connects the death of Apsyrtus with the Apsyrtides, islands off the 
coast of Illyria, in the Adriatic (vii p. 315). 


ARGONAUTS IN LIBYA. 239 


voyage, full of hardship and privation, before she was permitted 
to reach home. The returning heroes traversed an immeasurable 
length both of sea and of river: first up the river Phasis into the 
ocean which flows round the earth — then following the course of 
that circumfluous stream until its junction with the Nile,! they 
came down the Nile into Egypt, from whence they carried the 
Argé on their shoulders by a fatiguing land-journey to the lake 
Triténis in Libya. Here they were rescued from the extremity 
of want and exhaustion by the kindness of the local god Tritén, 
who treated them hospitably, and even presented to Euphémus a 
clod of earth, as a symbolical promise that his descendants should 
one day found a city on the Libyan shore. The promise was 
amply redeemed by the flourishing and powerful city of Kyréné,2 
whose princes the Battiads boasted themselves as lineal descend- 
ants of Euphémus. 

Refreshed by the hospitality of Tritén, the Argonauts found 
themselves again on the waters of the Mediterranean in their way 
homeward. But before they arrived at Idlkos they visited Circé, 
at the island of Aiea, where Médea was purified for the murder 
of Apsyrtus: they also stopped at Korkyra, then called Drepané, 
where Alkinous received and protected them. ‘The cave in that 
island where the marriage of Médea with Jasén was consum- 
mated, was still shown in the time of the historian Timzus, as 
well as the altars to Apollo which she had erected, and the rites 





1 The original narrative was, that the Argo returned by navigating the 
circumfluous ocean. This would be almost certain, even without positive 
testimony, from the early ideas entertained by the Greeks respecting geog- 
raphy ; but we know further that it was the representation of the Hesiodic 
poems, as well as of Mimnermus, Hekateus and Pindar, and even of Anti- 
machus. Schol. Parisina Ap. Rhod. iv. 254. ‘Exaraioc d& 6 MiAjouce did 
Tov Daoidoe avedVeiv dyoiv adbtode eic Tov ’Qkeavdv: did J? TOd "Qreavod 
wateadetv el¢ tov Neidov: éx dé tod Neidov eic tiv xaW’ jude Sadaccar. 
‘Hoiodog db? xat Tivdapog év TvSiovixare cat ’Avtivayoc év Avdg did Tod 
’Qxeavod gacty EAGeiv adtode ei¢ tiv AiBinv- eita Bactacavrac Thy ’Apyo 
ei¢ Td Huétepov adixéodat réAayoc. Compare the Schol. Edit. ad iv. 259. 

? See the fourth Pythian Ode of Pindar, and Apollén. Rhod. iv. 1551-1756. 

The tripod of Jasén was preserved by the Euesperita in Libya, Diod. iv, 
56: but the legend, connecting the Argonauts with the lake Triténis in Libya, 
is given with some considerable differences in Herodotus, iv. 179. 


240 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


and sacrifices which she had first instituted! After leaving 
Korkyra, the Argé was overtaken by a perilous storm near the 
island of Théra. ‘The heroes were saved from imminent peril by 
the supernatural aid of Apollo, who, shooting from his golden bow 
an arrow which pierced the waves like a track of light, caused a 
new island suddenly to spring up in their track and present to 
them a port of refuge. The island was called Anaphé; and the 
grateful Argonauts established upon it an altar and sacrifices in 
honor of Apollo Aglétés, which were ever afterwards continued, 
and traced back by the inhabitants to this originating adventure.? 

On approaching the coast of Kréte, the Argonauts were pre- 
vented from landing by Talés, a man of brass, fabricated by 
Héphestos, and presented by him to Minés for the protection of 
the island.3 This vigilant sentinel hurled against the approach- 
ing vessel fragments of rock, and menaced the heroes with de- 
struction. But Médea deceived him by a stratagem and killed 
him ; detecting and assailing the one vulnerable point in his body. 
The Argonauts were thus enabled to land and refresh themselves. 
They next proceeded onward to gina, where however they 
again experienced resistance before they could obtain water — 
then along the coast of Eubcea and Locris back to Iélkas in the 
gulf of Pagase, the place from whence they had started. The 
proceedings of Pelias during their absence, and the signal revenge 
taken upon him by Médea after their return, have already been 
narrated in a preceding section.4 The ship Argd herself, in 
which the chosen heroes of Greece had performed so long a 
voyage and braved so many dangers, was consecrated by Jas6n te 
Poseidén at the isthmus of Corinth. According to another 





1 Apollon. Rhod. iv. 1153-1217, . Timaus, Fr. 7-8, Didot. Tijatog év 
Keprtpe Aéyor yevéodvat rode yauoug, kal rept tig Suoiac loropei, Ere Kat vi 
déyov dyeodat abt kar’ éviavrov, Mydeciec arpGrov Svoaone év TH TOD ATOA- 
Advog lepd. Kat Beopods dé dnot prnpeia Tov yauwy ldpicacdat ovveyyde 
uty ric Vardoone, ob poxpav d? THe TOAEwc. ’Ovoudfovar dé Toy wey, Noppave 
Toy 8, Napniduv. 

2 Apollodér. i. 9, 25... Apollon. Rhod. iv. 1700-1725. 

2 Some called Talos a remnant of the brazen race of men (Schol. Apoll 
Rhod. iv. 1641). 

4 Apollodér. i. 9, 26. Apollon Rhod. iv 1638. 


MEMORIALS LEFT BY THE ARGONAUTS. 941 


account, she was translated to the stars by Athéné, and became a 
constellation.! 

Traces of the presence of the Argonauts were found not only 
in the regions which lay between Idlkos and Kolchis, but also in 
the western portion of the Grecian world — distributed more or 
less over all the spots visited by Grecian mariners or settled by 
Grecian colonists, and scarcely less numerous than the wander- 
ings of the dispersed Greeks and Trojans after the capture of 
Troy. The number of Jasonia, or temples for the heroic worship 
of Jasén, was very great, from Abdéra in 'Thrace,? eastward along 
the coast of the Euxine, to Armenia and Medea. The Argonauts 
had left their anchoring-stone on the coast of Bebrykia, near 
Kyzikus, and there it was preserved during the historical ages in 
the temple of the Jasonian Athéné.3 They had founded the great 
temple of the Idan mother on the mountain Dindymon, near 
Kyzikus, and the Hieron of Zeus Urios on the Asiatic point af 
the mouth of the Euxine, near which was also the harbor of 
Phryxus.4 Idmén, the prophet of the expedition, who was 
believed to have died of a wound by a wild boar on the Mary- 
andynian coast, was worshipped by the inhabitants of the Pontie 
Hérakleia with great solemnity, as their Heros Poliuchus, and 
that too by the special direction of the Delphian god. Autolykus, 
another companion of Jasén, was worshipped as Cikist by the 
inhabitants of Sinopé. Moreover, the historians of Hérakleia 
pointed out a temple of Hekaté in the neighboring country of 





1? Diodor. iv. 53. Eratosth. Catasterism. c. 35. 
2 Strabo, xi. p. 526-531. 
- 3 Apollon. Rhod. i. 955-960, and the Scholia. 

There was in Kyzikus a temple of Apollo under different érixAgoetc ; 
some called it the temple of the Jasonian Apollo. 

Another anchor however was preserved in the temple of Rhea on the banks 
of the Phasis, which was affirmed to be the anchor of the ship Argé. Arrian 
saw it there, but seems to have doubted its authenticity (Periplus, Euxin. 
Pont. p. 9. Geogr. Min. y. 1). 

4 Neanthés ap. strabo. i. p.45. Apollén. Rhod. i. 1125, and Schol. Steph. 
Byz. v. ®pifoc. 

Apollonius mentions the fountain called Jasonezx, on the hill of Dindymon. 
Apollén. Rhod. ii. 532, and the citations from Timosthenés and Herodérus in 
the Scholia. See also Appian. Syriac. c. 63. 

YOU. I. EL 16oc. 


242 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Paphlagonia, first erected by Médea;! and the important town sf 
Pantikapzon, on the European side of the Cimmerian Bosporus, 
ascribed its first settlement to a son of Avétés.2. When the return- 
ing ten thousand Greeks sailed along the coast, called the Jaso- 
nian shore, from Sinopé to Hérakleia, they were told that the 
grandson of A&étés was reigning king of the territory at the mouth 
of the Phasis, and the anchoring-places where the Argd had 
stopped were specially pointed out to them.? In the lofty re- 
gions of the Moschi, near Kolchis, stood the temple of Leukothea, 
founded by Phryxus, whieh remained both rich and respected 
down to the times of the kings of Pontus, and where it was an 
inviolable rule not to offer up a ram The town of Dioskurias, 
north of the river Phasis, was believed to have been hallowed by 
the presence of Kastér and Pollux in the Argé, and to have re- 
ceived from them its appellation.6 Even the interior of Médea 
and Armenia was full of memorials of Jasén and Médea and 
their son Médus, or of Armenus the son of Jasén, from whom the 
Greeks deduced not only the name and foundation of the Medes 
and Armenians, but also the great operation of cutting a channel 
through the mountains for the efflux of the river Araxes, which 
they compared to that of the Peneius in Thessaly.6 And the 





1 See the historians of Hérakleia, Nymphis and Promathidas, Fragm. Orelli, 
pp. 99, 100-104. Schol. ad Apollon. Rhod. iv. 247. Strabo, xii. p, 546, 
Autolykus, whom he calls companion of Jasén, was, according to another 
legend, comrade of Héraklés in his expedition against the Amazons. 

* Stephan. Byz. v. [avrxaraiov, Eustath. ad Dionys. Perieget. 311. 

3 Xenoph6én, Anabas. vi. 2,1; v. 7, 37. 4 Strabo, xi. p. 499. 

5 Appian, Mithridatic. ¢. 101. 

® Strabo, xi. p. 499, 503, 526, 531; i, p. 45-48. Justin, xlii. 3, whose 
statements illustrate the way in which men found a present home and appli- 
cation for the old fables, —“ Jason, primus humanorum post Herculem et 
Liberum, qui reges Orientis fuisse traduntur, eam cceli plagam domuisse 
dicitur. Cum Albanis foedus percussit, qui Herculem ex Italid ab Albano 
monte, cum, Geryone extincto, armenta ejus per Italiam duceret, secuti 
dicuntur; quique, memores Italics originis, exercitam Cn. Pompeii bello 
Mithridatico fratres consalutayére. Itaque Jasoni totus fere Oriens, ut con- 
ditori, divinos honores templaque constituit ; quae Parmenico, dux Alexandri 
Magni, post multos annos dirui jussit, ne culnedonen nomen in Oriente yene 
rabilius quam Alexandri esset.” 

The Thessalian companions of Alexander the Grvet placed by his victo ies 
in possession of rich acquisitions in these regions, pleased themselyes by 


a i a i i ll i als El 


MEMORIALS LEFT BY THE ARGONAUTS. 943 


Roman general Pompey, after having completed the conquest and 
expulsion of Mithridatés, made long marches through Kolchis 


-into the regions of Caucasus, for the express purpose of contem- 


plating the spots which had been ennobled by the exploits of the 
Argonauts, the Dioskuri and Héraklés.! 

In the west, memorials either of the Argonauts or of the pur’ 
suing Kolchians were pointed out in Korkyra, in Kréte, in Epi- 
rus near the Akrokeraunian mountains, in the islands called Ap- 
syrtides near the Illyrian coast,at the bay of Caieta as well as at 
Poseidénia on the southern coast of Italy, in the island of Aétha- 
lia or Elba, and in Libya.? 

Such is a brief outline of the Argonautic expedition, one of 
the most celebrated and widely-diffused among the ancient tales - 
of Greece. Since so many able men have treated it as an un- 
disputed reality, and even made it the pivot of systematic chro- 
nological calculations, | may here repeat the opinion long ago 
expressed by Heyne, and even indicated by Burmann, that the 
process of dissecting the story, in search of a basis of fact, is one 
altogether fruitless. Not only are we unable to assign the date 





vivifying and multiplying all these old fables, proving an ancient kindred 
between the Medes and Thessalians. See Strabo, xi. p. 530. The temples 
of Jas6n were Tiaueva ofddpa ixd THv BapBapwr (ib. p. 526). 

The able and inquisitive geographer Eratosthenés was among those who 
fully believed that Jasén had left his ships in the Phasis, and had undertaken 
a land expedition into the interior country, in which he had conquered Media 
and Armenia (Strabo, i. p. 48). 

1 Appian, Mithridatic. 103: trode KéAyoug érjet, kad’ ioropiav tig ’Apyo 
vavtov Kal Atocxotpwv Kat "HpakAéove éridnuiac, Kal padcora Td wa80¢ ideiv 
é3é2ov, 5 Mpoundet dact yevéotac rept td Katxacov dpoc. The lofty crag 
of Caucasus called Strobilus, to which Prométheus had been attached, 
was pointed out to Arrian himself in his Periplus (p. 12. Geogr. Minor 
vol. i.). 

® Strabo, i. pp. 21, 45,46; v. 224-252. Pompon. Mel. ii 3. Diodér. iv. 
56. Apollon. Rhod. iv. 656. Lycophron, 1273. — 


Tépoww paredvac dugt Kipraiov varac 
*Apyoi¢ Te KAewvoy dpyov Ainrny péyar. 


? Heyne, Obsery. ad Apollodér. i. 9, 16. p. 72. “ Miram in modum fallitur, 
qui in his commentis ccrtum fandum historicum vel geographicum aut ex- 


244 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


or identify the crew, or decipher the log-book, of the Argé, but 
we have no means of settling even the preliminary question, 
whether the voyage be matter of fact badly reported, or legend. 
from the beginning. The widely-distant spots in which the mon- 
uments of the voyage were shown, no less than the incidents of 
the voyage itself, suggests no other parentage than epical fancy. 
The supernatural and the romantic not only constitute an insep- 
arable portion of the narrative, but even embrace all the promi- 
nent and characteristic features; if they do not comprise the 
whole, and if there be intermingled along with them any sprink 
ling of historical or geographical fact, — a question to us indeter- 
minable, — there is at least no solvent by which it can be disen- 
gaged, and no test by which it can be recognized. Wherever 
the Grecian mariner sailed, he carried his religious and patriotic 
mythes along with him. His fancy and his faith were alike full 
of the long wanderings of Jasén, Odysseus, Perseus, Héraklés, 
Dionysus, Triptolemus or I6; it was pleasing to him in success, 
and consoling to him in difficulty, to believe that their journeys 
had brought them over the ground which he was himself travers- 
ing. There was no tale amidst the wide range of the Grecian 
epic more calculated to be popular with the seaman, than the 
history of ,the primeval ship Argéd and her distinguished crew, 
comprising heroes from all parts of Greece, and especially the 





quirere studet, aut se reperisse, atque historicam vel geographicam aliquam 
doctrinam, systema nos dicimus, inde procudi posse, putat,” ete. 

See also the observations interspersed in Burmann’s Catalogus Axgonene 
rum, prefixed to his edition of Valerius Flaccus. 

The Persian antiquarians whom Herodotus cites at the beginning of his 
history (i, 2-4— it is much to be regretted that Herodotus did not inform us 
who they were, and whether they were the same as those who said that Per- 
seus was an Assyrian by birth and had become a Greek, vi. 54), joined 
together the abductions of I6 and of Eurépé, of Médea and of Helen, as 
pairs of connected proceedings, the second injury being a retaliat*on for the 
first, — they drew up a debtor and creditor account of abductions between 
Asia and Europe. The Kolchian king (they said) had sent a herald to 
Greece to ask for his satisfaction for the wrong done to him by Jasén and to 
re-demand his daughter Médea; but he was told in reply that the Greeks had 
received no satisfaction for the previous rape of I6. 

There was some ingenuity in thus binding together the old fables, so as ta 
represent the invasions of Greece by Darius and Xerxés as retaliations fot 
the wnexpiated destruction wrovght by Agamemnon. 


FABULOUS LOCALITIES. 245 


Tyndarids Kastér and Pollux, the heavenly protector: invoked 
during storm and peril. He localized the legend anew wherever 
he went, often with some fresh circumstances suggested either by 
his own adventures or by the scene before him. He took a sort 
of religious possession of the spot, connecting it by a bond of 
faith with his native land, and erecting in it a temple or an altar 
with appropriate commemorative solemnities. The Jasonium 
thus established, and indeed every visible object called after the 
name of the hero, not only served to keep alive the legend of 
the Argé in the minds of future comers or inhabitants, but was 
accepted as an obvious and satisfactory proof that this marvellous 
vessel had actually touched there in her voyage. 

The epic poets, building both on the general love of fabulous 
incident and on the easy faith of the people, dealt with distant 
and unknown space in the same manner as with past. and unre- 
corded time. They created a mythical geography for the for- 
mer, and a mythical history for the latter. But there was this 
material difference between the two: that while the unrecorded 
time was beyond the reach of verification, the unknown space 
gradually became trodden and examined. In proportion as au- 
thentic local knowledge was enlarged, it became necessary to 
modify the geography, or shift the scene of action, of the old 
mythes ; and this perplexing problem was undertaken by some 
of the ablest historians and geographers of antiquity, — for it was 
painful to them to abandon any portion of the old epie, as if it 
were destitute of an ascertainable basis of truth. 

Many of these fabulous localities are to be found in Homer 
and Hesiod, and the other Greek poets and logographers,— Ery- 
theia, the garden of the Hesperides, the garden of Phcoebus,! te 
which Boreas transported the Attic maiden Orithyia, the deli- 
cious country of the Hyperboreans, the Elysian plain,? the fleet 
ing island of AXolus, Thrinakia, the country of the A{thiopians, the 





1 Sophokl. ap. Strabo. vii. p. 295.— 
'Yxép te wovtTov wav?’ éx’ Eoxata ytovic, 
Nuxrég te mnyac obpavod 7’ dvanrvyiic, 
Goifou re radaidyv Kyrov. 
2 Odyss. iv. 562. The Islands of the Blessed, in Hesiod, are near the 
ocean (Opp. Di. 169). 


246 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Lestrygones, the Kyklépes, the Lotophagi, the Sirens, the Cim 
merians and the Gorgons,! ete. ‘These are places which (to use 
the expression of Pindar respecting the Hyperboreans) you can- 
not approach either by sea or by land ° the wings of the poet 
alone can carry you thither. They were not introduced into the 
Greek mind by incorrect geographical reports, but, on the con- 
trary, had their origin in the legend, and passed from thence into 
the realities of geography,? which they contributed much to per- 
vert and confuse. or the navigator or emigrant, starting with 
an unsuspicious faith in their real existence, looked out for them 
in his distant voyages, and constantly fancied that he had seen or 
heard of them, so as to be able to identify their exact situation. 
The most contradictory accounts indeed, as might be expected, 
were often given respecting the latitude and longitude of such 
fanciful spots, but this did not put an end to the general belief 
in their real existence. 

In the present advanced state of geographical knowledge, the 
story of that man who after reading Gulliver’s Travels went to 





! Hesiod, Theogon. 275-290, Homer, Iliad, i. 423. Odyss. i, 23; ix 
86-206 ; x 4-83; xii. 135. Mimnerm. Fragm. 13, Schneidewin. 
* Pindar, Pyth. x. 29.— 


Navoi © obre meld lav dv ebpoig 
"Ec ‘YrrepBopéwv dydva Yavyatay dor. 
Ilap’ ol¢ wore Ilepoede édaicaro Aayerae, ete. 


Hesiod, and the old epic poem called the Epigoni, both mentioned the Hyper 
boreans (Herod. iv. 32-34). 

3 This idea is well stated and sustained by Volcker (Mythische Geographie 
der Griechen und Rémer, cap. i. p. 11), and by Nitzsch in his Comments on 
the Odyssey —Introduct. Remarks to b. ix. p. xii-xxxiii. The twelfth 
and thirteenth chapters of the History of Orchomenos, by O. Miiller, are 
also full of good remarks on the geography of the Argonautic voyage (pp. 
274-299). 

The most striking evidence of this disposition of the Greeks is to be 
found in the legendary discoveries of Alexander and his companions, when 
they marched over the untrodden regions in the east of the Persian empire 
(see Arrian, Hist. Al. vy. 3: compare Lucian. Dialog. Mortuor. xiv. vol. i. p. 
212. Tauch’, because these ideas were first broached at a time when geo- 
graphical science was sufficiently advanced to canvass and criticize them, 
The early settlers in Italy, Sicily and the Euxine, indulged their fanciful 
vision without the fear of any such monitor: there was no surh thing as ¢ 
map before the days of Anaximander, the disciple of Thalés. 


PERVERSION O SEOGRAPMY BY LEGEND. 247 


look in his map for Lilliput, appears an absurdity. But those 
who fixed the exact locality of tae floating island of olus or 
the rocks of the Sirens did much the same;! and, with their ig- 
norance of geography and imperfect appreciation of historical 
evidence, the error was hardly to be avoided. The ancient be- 
lief which fixed the Sirens on the islands of Sirenuse off the 
coast of Naples —the Kyklépes, Erytheia, and the Lestrygones 
in Sicily —the Lotophagi on the island of Méninx? near the 
Lesser Syrtis—the Pheakians at Korkyra—and the goddess 
Circé at the promontory of Circeium— took its rise at a time 
when these regions were first Hellenized and comparatively little 
visited. Once embodied in the local legends, and attested by vis- 
ible monuments and ceremonies, it continued for a long time un- 
assailed ; and Thucydidés seems to adopt it, in reference to Kor- 
kyra and Sicily before the Hellenic colonization, as matter of 
fact generally unquestionable,’ though little avouched as to de- 
tails. But when geograpical knowledge became extended, and 
the criticism upon the ancient epic was more or less systematized 
by the literary men of Alexandria and Pergamus, it appeared to 
many of them impossible that Odysseus could have seen so 
many wonders, or undergone such monstrous dangers, within 
limits so narrow, and in the familiar track between the Nile and 
the Tiber. The scene of his weather-driven course was then 
shifted further westward. Many convincing evidences were dis- 
covered, especially by Asklepiadés of Myrlea, of his having vis- 
ited various places in Iberia:* several critics imagined that he 





1 See Mr. Payne Knight, Prolegg. ad Homer. c. 49. Compare Spohn— 
“de extrema Odyssex parte” —p. 97. 

2 Strabo, xvii. p. 834. An altar of Odysseus was shown upon this island, 
as well as some other evidences (ciuSoAc) of his visit to the place. 

Apollénius Rhodius copies the Odyssey in speaking of the island of Thri- 
nakia and the cattle of Helios (iv. 965, with Schol.). He conceives Sicily 
as Thrinakia, a name afterwards exchanged for Trinakria. The Scholiast 
ad Apoll. (1. c.) speaks of Trinax king of Sicily. Compare iv. 291 with the 
Scholia. 

3 Thucyd. i. 25-vi. 2. These local legends appear in the eyes of Strabo 
convincing evidence (i. p. 23-26),—the tomb of the siren Parthenopé at 
Naples, the stories at Cums and Dikzarchia about the vexvoyavreiov of 
Avernus, and the existence of places named after Bains and-Misénus, the 
companions of Odysseus, ete. 

“ Strabo, iii. p. 150-157. Od ydp uovov ol Kara tiv "Iradiav Kal Lixehion 


248 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


had wandered about in the Atlantic Ocean outside of the Strait 
of Gibraltar,! and they recognized a section of Lotophagi on the 





rémot Kal GAAoL Tives TOY ToLobTwY onpueia broypadovoly, GAAG Kat ev TH 
1Bnpia ‘Odbocera rbAug Oeixvutat, Kal ’ADnvae lepdv, kal GAAa popia ixvy 
rig éxeivov mAGrNE, Kal GAAwy Tév éx Tod Tpwikod roAguov meptyevouévov 
(I adopt Grosskurd’s correction of the text from yevouévwr to reptyevopévur, 
in the note to his German translation of Strabo), 

Asklepiadés (of Myrlea in Bithynia, about 170 B. ¢.) resided some time 
in Turditania, the south-western region of Spain along the Guadalquivir, 
as a teacher of Greek literature (mawdetoag rd ypauparixi), and com 
posed a periegesis of the Iberian tribes, which unfortunately has not been 
preserved. He made various discoveries in archeology, and successfully 
connected his old legends with several portions of the territory before him. 
His discoveries were, —1. In the temple of Athéné, at this Iberian town of 
Odysseia, there were shields and beaks of ships affixed to the walls, monu- 
ments of the visit of Odysseus himself. 2. Among the Kalleki, in the 
northern part of Portugal, several of the companions of Teukros had set- 
tled and left descendants: there were in that region two Grecian cities, one 
called Hellenés, the other called Amphilochi; for Amphilochus also, the son 
of Amphiaraus, had died in Iberia, and many of his soldiers had taken up 
their permanent residence in the interior. 8. Many new inhabitants had 
come into Iberia with the expedition of Héraklés; some also after the con- 
quest of Meséné by the Lacedemonians. 4. In Cantabria, on the north 
coast of Spain, there was a town and region of Lacedemonian colonists, 
5. In the same portion of the country there was the town of Opsikella, 
founded by Opsikellas, one of the companions of Antenor in his emigration 
from Troy (Strabo, iii. p. 157). 

This is a specimen of the manner in which the seeds of Grecian mythus 
came to be distributed over so large a surface. To an ordinary Greek 
reader, these legendary discoveries of Asklepiadés would probably be more 
interesting than the positive facts which he communicated respecting the 
Iberian tribes; and his Turditanian auditors would be delighted to hear —- 
while he was reciting and explaining to them the animated passage of the 
Iliad, in which Agamemndn extols the inestimable value of the bow of 
Teukros (viii. 281) — that the heroic archer and his companions had actually 
set foot in the Iberian peninsula. 

! This was the opinion of Kratés of Mallus, one of the most distinguished 
of the critics on Homer: it was the subject of an animated controversy be- 
tween him and Aristarchus (Aulus Gellius, N. A. xiv. 6; Strabo, iii. p. 157), 
See the instructive treatise of Lehrs, De Aristarchi Studiis, c. v. § 4. p. 251. 
Much controversy also took place among the critics respecting the ground 
which Menelaus went over in his wanderings (Odyss. iv.). Kratés affiamed 
that he had circumnavigated the southern extremity of Africa and gone ta 


ERYTHEIA. — GERYON. 249 


coast of Mauritania, over and above those who dwelt on the 
island of Méninx.! On the other hand, Eratosthenés and Apol 
lodérus treated the places visited by Odysseus as altogether un 
real, for which scepticism they incurred much reproach2 

The fabulous island of Erytheia, — the residence of the three 
headed Geryén with his magnificent herd of oxen, under the 
custody of the two-headed dog Orthrus, and described by He- 
siod, like the garden of the Hesperides, as extra-terrestrial, on the 
farther side of the circumfluous ocean ;— this island was sup- 
posed by the interpreters of Stesichorus the poet to be named by 
him off the south-western region of Spain called Tartéssus, and 
in the immediate vicinity of Gadés. But the historian Heka- 
tzeus, in his anxiety to historicize the old fable, took upon him- 
self to remove Erytheia from Spain nearer home to Epirus. He 
thought it incredible that Héraklés should have traversed Europe 
from east to west, for the purpose of bringing the cattle of Ger- 
yon to Eurystheus at Mykénx, and he pronounced Geryén to 
have been a king of Epirus, near the Gulf of Ambrakia. The 
oxen reared in that neighborhood were proverbially magnificent, 
and to get them even from thence and bring them to Mykénw 
(he contended) was no inconsiderable task. Arrian, who cites 
this passage from Hekatzus, concurs in the same view,—an il- 
lustration of the license with which ancient authors fitted on 
their fabulous geographical names to the real earth, and brought 
down the ethereal matter of legend to the lower atmosphere of 


history. 





India: the critic Aristonikus, Strabo’s contemporary, enumerated all the 
different opinions (Strabo, i. p. 38). 

' Strabo, iii. p. 157. 2 Strabo, i. p. 22-44; vii. p. 299 

3 Stesichori Fragm. ed. Kleine; Geryonis, Fr. 5. p. 60; ap. Strabo. iii. p. 
148; Herodot. iv. 8. It seems very doubtful whether Stesichorus meant to 
indicate any neighboring island as Erytheia, if we compare Fragm. 10. p. 
67 of the Geryonis, and the passages of Athenxus and Eustathius there 
ctied. He seems to have adhered to the old fable, placing Erytheia on 
the opposite side of the ocean-stream, for Héraklés crosses the ocean to get 
to it. 

Hekateus, ap. Arrian. Histor. Alex. ii. 16. Skylax places Erytheia, 
“ whither Geryén is said to have come to feed his oxen,” in the Kastid terri- 
tory near the Greek city of Apollénia on the Ionic Gulf, northward of the 
Keraunian mountains. ‘There were splendid cattle consecrated to Hélios 


1 Sa 


¥ 


250 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Both the track and the terminus of the Argonautic voyage ap- 
pear in the most ancient epic as little within the conditions of real- 
ity, as the speaking timbers or the semi-divine crew of the vessel. 
In the Odyssey, ASétés and Circé (Hesiod names Médea also) are 
brother and sister, offspring of Hélios. The/®zan island, adjoining 
the circumfluous ocean, “ where the house and dancing-ground of 
Eos are situated, and where Hélios rises,” is both the residence of 
Circé and of Aétés, inasmuch as Odysseus, in returning from the 
former, follows the same course as the Argé had previously taken 
in returning from the latter.!_ Even in the conception of Mimner- 
mus, about 600 B. c., Aéa still retained its fabulous attributes in 
conjunction with the ocean and Hélios, without having been yet 
identified with any known portion of the solid earth ;? and it was 
justly remarked by Démétrius of Sképsis in antiquity? (though 





near Apollénia, watched by the citizens of the place with great care (Hero- 
dot. ix. 95; Skylax, c. 26). 

About Erytheia, Cellerius observes (Geogr. Ant. ii. 1, 227), “Insula Ery- 
theia, quam veteres adjungunt Gadibus, vel demersa est, vel in scopulis quex- 
renda, vel pars est ipsarum Gadium, neque hodie ejus forme aliqua, uti 
descripta est, fertur superesse.” To make the disjunctive catalogue complete, 
he ought to have added, “or it never really existed,” — not the least proba: 
ble supposition of all. 

1 Hesiod, Theogon. 956-992; Homer, Odyss. xii. 3-69. — 

Nijoov é¢ Alainv, 631 7’ "Hod¢ jptyeveing 

Olkia Kat xOpot eiot, Kat dvToAai hedioro. 

2 Mimnerm. Fragm. 10-11, Schneidewin ; Athenz. vii. p. 277. — 

Oddé kor’ dy péya KOac dviyayev adbric¢ "Ijowv 

"EE Aine tedéoag dAyiwdeccar ddr, 
'YBpiorn Wedin rerAcwv yarerhpec dedAov, 

Ovid? dy éx’ ’Qxcavod Kaddv ixoyto poor. 

* * * * * 

Aintao réAtv, T6391 7” Okéog "Hedioo 

*Axrivec xpvoéy Keiarat ty Dahan, 
*’Qreavod mapa yeidreo’, iv’ GyeTo Beioc ljowy. 

3 Strabo, i. p. 45-46. AeuArpioc 5 UKippioc...... mpc NeadvdOn tov Kutc- 
«Kyvov dtAoTimoTépac avritéyar, elmévra, bri ol "Apyovaitat mAéovtes 
elg Daoww rdv bg’ ‘Oujpov Kal tov GAAwY dpodoyobpuevov rAodv, idpboavro 
Ta tig "Idaiag pnrpde lepa éxt Kitixov...... apxnv onot und eidévat 
thv el¢ Gadatv drodnpiav rot lécovog “Opgjpov. Again, p. 
46, mapaAaBav péprupa Mipvepuor, d¢ év 7H ’QeeavH rowjoag olknow Aljrou, 
etc. 
The adverb ¢:Aorinorépwe reveals to us the municipal rivalry and conten 


ST 


EETES.—CIRCE.— ZEA. 951 


Strabo vamly tries to refute him), that neither Homer nor Mim- 
nermus designates Kolchis either as the residence of Métés, or 
as the terminus of the Argonautic voyage. Hesiod carried the 
returning, Argonauts through the river Phasis into the ocean. 
But some of the poems ascribed to Eumélus were the first 
which mentioned Atétés and Kolchis, and interwove both of 
them into the Corinthian mythical genealogy.!_ These poems seem 
to have been composed subsequent to the foundation of Sinopé, 
and to the commencement of Grecian settlement on the Borys- 
thenés, between the years 600 and 500 B.c.. The Greek mari- 
ners who explored and colonized the southern coast of the Eux- 
ine, found at the extremity of their voyage the river Phasis 
and its barbarous inhabitants: it was the easternmost point 
which Grecian navigation (previous to the time of Alexander the 
Great) ever attained, and it was within sight of the impassable 
barrier of Caucasus.2 They believed, not unnaturally, that they 
had here found “the house of Eés (the morning) and the rising 
place of the sun,” and that the river Phasis, if they could follow 
it to its unknown beginning, would conduct them to the cireum- 
fluous ocean. They gave to the spot the name of Ma, and the 
fabulous and real title gradually became associated together into 
one compound appellation, —the Kolchian ‘a, or Aéa of Kol- 
chis.3 While Kolchis was thus entered on the map as a fit re- 
presentative for the Homeric “house of the morning,” the nar- 
row strait of the Thracian Bosporus attracted to itself the 
poetical fancy of the Symplégades, or colliding rocks, through 
which the heaven-protected Argo had been the first to pass. 
The powerful Greek cities of Kyzikus, Hérakleia and Sinopé, 
each fertile in local legends, still farther contributed to give this 
direction to the voyage ; so that in the time of Hekatzus it had 
hecome the established belief that the Argd had started fror 
Télkos and gone to Kolchis. 

/®étés thus received his home from the legendary faith and 





tion between the small town Sképsis and its powerful neighbor Kyzikus, 
respecting points of comparative archeology. 

1 Eumélus, Fragm. Eipoxia 7, Kopiviaxd 2-5. pp. 63-68, Dantzer. 

? Arrian, Periplus Pont. Euxin. p. 12; ap. Geogr. Minor. vol. i. He saw 
the Caucasus from Dioskurias. 

3 Heroilot i. 2; vii. 193-197. Eurip. Med. 2. Valer. Flacc. vy. 57 


net 
% = 
; tM, 


fancy of the eastern Greek navigators: his sister Cireé, origi- 
nally his fellow-resident, was localized by the western, The 
Hesiodic and other poems, giving expression to the imaginative 
impulses of the inhabitants of Cumz and other early Grecian 
settlers in Italy and Sicily,! had referred the wanderings of 
Odysseus to the western or Tyrrhenian sea, and had planted the 
Cyclopes, the Lestrygones, the floating island of Molus, the 
Lotophagi, the Phzacians, etc., about the coast of Sicily, Italy, 
Libya, and Korkyra. In this way the A®zan island,—the resi 
dence of Circé, and the extreme point of the wanderings of 
Odysseus, from whence he passes only to the ocean and inte 
Hadés —came to be placed in the far west, while the AXa of 
JEétés was in the far east,—not unlike our East and West In- 
dies. The Homeric brother and sister were separated and sent 
to opposite extremities of the Grecian terrestrial horizon.2 

The track from Iélkos to Kolchis, however, though plausible 
as far as it went, did not realize all the conditions of the genuine 
fabulous voyage: it did not explain the evidences of the visit of 
these maritime heroes which were to be found in Libya, in Krété 


252 : HISTORY OF GREECE. 





1 Strabo, i. p. 23. Volcker (Ueber Homerische Geographie, y. 66) is in 
structive upon this point, as upon the geography of the Greek poets gene- 
rally... He recognizes the purely mythical character of a in Homer and 
Hesiod, but he tries to prove —unsuccessfully, in my judgment — that 
Homer places AXétés in the east, while Circé is in the west, and that Homer 
refers the Argonautic voyage to the Euxine Sea. 

® Strabo (or Polybius, whom he has just been citing) contends that Homer 
knew the existence of Alétés in Kolchis, and of Circé at Circeium, as histor- 
ical persons, as well as the voyage of JasOn to Ala as an historical fact. 
Upon this he (Homer) built a superstructure of fiction (xpoouidevua): he 
invented the brotherhood between them, and he placed both the one and the 
other in the exterior ocean (avyyeveiac Te xdace TOv obTw dipKiopLévor, Kat 
éSwxeaviopov dudgoiv, i. p. 20); perhaps also Jason might have wandered as 
far as Italy, as evidences (oyjyeid trva) are shown that he did (7b.). 

But the idea that Homer conceived Aétés in the extreme east and Circé 
in the extreme west, is not reconcilable with the Odyssey. The supposition 
of Strabo is alike violent and unsatisfactory. 

Circé was worshipped as a goddess at Circeii (Cicero, Nat. Deor. iii. 19). 
Hesiod, in the Theogony, represents the two sons of Cireé by Odysseus as 
reigning over all the warlike Tyrrhenians (Theog. 1012), an undefined 
western sovereignty. The great Mamilian gens at Tusculum traced the 
descent to Odysseus and Circé (Dionys. Hal. iy. 45). 


. RETURN OF THE ARGONAUTS. 253 


m Anaphé, in Korkyra, in the Adriati: Gulf, in Italy and in 
Jéthalia. It became necessary to devise another route for them 
in their return, and the Hesiodic narrative was (as I have before 
observed), that they came back by the circumfluous ocean ; first 
going up the river Phasis into the circumfluous ocean; follow- 
ing that deep and gentle stream until they entered the Nile, 
and came down its course to the coast of Libya. This seemg 
also to have been the belief of Hekatzus.! But presently sev- 
eral Greeks (and Herodotus among them) began to discard the 
idea of a circumfluous ocean-stream, which had pervaded their 
old geographical and astronomical fables, and which explained 
the supposed easy communication between one extremity of the 
earth and another. Another idea was then started for the return- 
ing voyage of the Argonauts. It was supposed that the river 
Ister, or Danube, flowing from the Rhipzan mountains in th. 
north-west of Europe, divided itself into two branches, one of 
which fell into the Euxine Sea, and the other into the Adriatic. 
The Argonauts, fleeing from the pursuit of Aétés, had been 
obliged to abandon their regular course homeward, and had gone 
from the Euxine Sea up the Ister; then passing down the other 
branch of that river, they had entered into the Adriatic, the 
Kolchian pursuers following them. Such is the story given by 
Apollénius Rhodius from Timagétus, and accepted even by so 
able a geographer as Eratosthenés— who preceded him by one 
generation, and who, though sceptical in regard to the localities 
visited by Odysseus, seems to have been a firm believer in the 
reality of the Argonautic voyage.? Other historians again, among 





' See above, p. 239. There is an opinion cited from Hekateeus in Schol. 
Apoll. Rhod. iv. 284. contrary to this, which is given by the same scholiast 
on iv. 259. But, in spite of the remarks of Klausen (ad Fragment. Heka- 
tei, 187. p. 98), I think that the Schol. ad. iv. 284 has made a mistake in 
citing Hekatsus; the more so as the scholiast, as printed from the Codex 
Parisinus, cites the same opinion without mentioning Hekatseus. Accord 
ing to the old Homeric idea, the ocean stream flowed all round the earth, 
and was the source of all the principal rivers which flowed into the great in- 
ternal sea, or Mediterranean (see Hekatzeus, Fr. 349; Klausen, ap. Arrian. 
ii. 16, where he speaks of the Mediterranean as the weyGAq SaAacoa). Re- 
taining this old idea of the ocean-stream, Hekateus would naturally believe 
that the Phasis joined it: nor can I agree with Klausen (ad Fr. 187) that 
this implies a degree of ignorance too gross 4o impute to him. 

? Apollén. Rhod. iv. 287; Schol. ad iv. 284: Pindar, Pyth. iv. 447, with 


D54 HISTORY OF GREECE. . 
whom was Timeus, though they considered the ocean as an out» 
er sea, and no longer admitted the existence of the old Homeric 
ocean-stream, yet imagined a story for the return-voyage of the 
Argonauts somewhat resembling the old tale of Hesiod and 
Hekataus. They alleged that the Arg6, after entering into the 
Palus Meotis, had followed the upward course of the river Ta. 
nais; that she had then been carried overland and launched in a 
river which had its mouth in the ocean or great outer sea. When 
in the ocean, she had coasted along the north and west of Europe 
until she reached Gadés and the Strait of Gibraltar, where she 
entered into the Mediterranean, and there visited the many places 
specified in the fable. Of this long voyage, in the outer sea to 
the north and west of Europe, many traces were affirmed to 
exist along the coast of the ocean.! There was again a third 
version, according to which the Argonauts came back as they 
went, through the Thracian Bosporus and the Hellespont. In 
this way geographical plausibility was indeed maintained, but a 
large portion of the fabulous matter was thrown overboard.? 
Such were the various attempts made to reconcile the Argo- 
nautic legend with enlarged geographical knowledge and improy- 
ed historical criticism. The problem remained unsolved, but the 





Schol.; Strabo, i. p. 46-57; Aristot. Mirabil. Auscult.¢. 105. Altars were 
shown in the Adriatic, which had been erected both by Jasén and by Médea 
(ib). 
Aristotle believed in the forked course of the Ister, with one embochure in 
the Euxine and another in the Adriatic: he notices certain fishes called tpr- 
ylat, who entered the river (like the Argonauts) from the Euxine, went up 
it as far as the point of bifurcation and descended into the Adriatic (Histor. 
Animal. viii. 15). Compare Ukert, Geographie der Griech. und Rémer, vol. 
iii. p. 145-147, about the supposed course of the Ister. 

1 Diodér. iv. 56; Timwus, Fragm. 53. Goller. Skymnus the geographer 
also adopted this opinion (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. 284-287). ‘The pseudo-Or- 
pheus in the poem called Argonautica seems to give a jumble of all the dif- 
ferent stories. 

® Diodér. iv. 49. ‘This was the tale both of Sophoklés and of Kallimachus 
(Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 2¢4). 

See the Dissertation of Ukert, Beylage iv. vol. i. part 2. p. 320 of his 
Geographie der Griechen und Rémer, which treats of the Argonautic voy- 
age at some length; also J. H. Voss, Alte Weltkunde aber die Gestalt der 
Erde, published in the second volume of the Kritische Blatter, pp. 162, 314- 
826; and Forbiger, Handbuch der Aken Geographie-Einleitung, p. 8. 


ARGONAUTIC LEGEND MODIFIED. 955. 


faith in the lsgend did not the less continue. It was a faith 
originally generated at a time when the unassisted narrative of 
the inspired poet sufficed for the conviction of his hearers; it 
consecrated one among the capital exploits of that heroic and 
superhuman race, whom the Greek was accustomed at once to 
look back upon as his ancestors and to worship conjointly with 
his gods: it lay too deep in his mind either to require historical 
evidence for its support, or to be overthrown by geographical 
difficulties as they were then appreciated. Supposed traces of 
the past event, either preserved in the names of places, or embo- 
died in standing religious customs with their explanatory com- 
ments, served as sufficient authentication in the eyes of the curious 
inquirer. And even men trained in a more severe school of 
criticism contented themselves with eliminating the palpable con- 
tradictions and softening down the supernatural and romantic 
events, so as to produce an Argonautic expedition of their own 
invention as the true and accredited history. Strabo, though he 
can neither overlook nor explain the geographical impossibilities 
of the narrative, supposes himself to have discovered the basis 
of actual fact, which the original poets had embellished or exag- 
gerated. ‘The golden fleece was typical of the great wealth of 
Kolchis, arising from gold-dust washed down by the rivers; and 
the voyage of Jasén was in reality an expedition at the head of 
a considerable army, with which he plundered this wealthy coun- 
try and made extensive conquests in the interior! Strabo has 
nowhere laid down what he supposes to have been the exact 
measure and direction of Jasén’s march, but he must have re- 
garded it as very long, since he classes Jasén with Dionysus and 
Héraklés, and emphatically characterizes all the three as having 





1 Strabo, i. p.45. He speaks here of the voyage of Phryxus, as well as 
that of Jasén, as having been a military undertaking (orpareia): so again, 
iii. p. 149, he speaks of the military expedition of Odysseus —7 Tod ’Odvo- 
séwe¢ orparia, and 7 ‘HpaxAéove orparia (ib.). Again xi. p. 498. Of pidoz, 
alvittopevot tiv "lacovoc arparetav mpoeAdvrog péypt Kat Mydiac> ere de 
modtepov Ty Spigov. Compare also Justin, xlii. 2-3; Tacit. Annal. vi. 34. 

Strabo cannot speak of the old fables with literal fidelity : he unconscious- 
ly transforms them into quasi-historical incidents of his own imagination. 
Diodérus gives a narrative of the same kind, with decent substitutes for the 
fabulous elements (iv. 40-47-56). 


256 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


traversed wider spaces of ground than any moderns cuald equal.! 
Such was the compromise which a mind like that of Strabo made 
with the ancient legends. He shaped or cut them down to the 
level of his own credence, and in this waste of historical criticism, 
without any positive evidence, he took to himself the credit of 
greater penetration than the literal believers, while he escaped 
the necessity of breaking formally with the bygone heroic world 





CHAPTER XIV. 
LEGENDS OF THEBES. 


Tue Bedtians generally, throughout the historical age, though 
well endowed with bodily strength and courage, are representec 
as proverbially deficient in intelligence, taste and fancy. But 
the legendary population of Thébes, the Kadmeians, are rich in 
mythical antiquities, divine as well as heroic. Both Dionysus 
and Héraklés recognize Thébes as their natal city. Moreover, 
the two sieges of Thébes by Adrastus, even taken apart from 





' Strabo, i. p. 48. The far-extending expeditions undertaken in the east- 
ern regions by Dionysus and Héraklés were constantly present to the mind 
of Alexander the Great as subjects of comparison with himself: he imposed 
upon his followers perilous and trying marches, from anxiety to equal or 
surpass the alleged exploits of Semiramis, Cyrus, Perseus, and Héraklés. 
(Arrian, v. 2,3; vi. 24,3; vii. 10,12. Strabo, iii. p. 171; xv. p. 686; xvii. 
p- 81). 

2 The eponym Boedtus is son of Poseidén and Arné (Euphorion ap. 
Eustath. ad Iliad. ii. 507).. It was from Arné in Thessaly that the Beedtians 
were said to haye come, when they invaded and occupied Beedtia. Euri- 
pidés made him son of Poseid6én and Melanippé. Another legend recited 

+ Bedtus and Hellén as sons of Poseidon and Antiopé (Hygin. f. 157-186). 

The Tanagrean poetess Korinna (the rival of Pindar, whose compositions 
in the Beedtian dialect are unfortunately lost) appears to have dwelt upon 
this native Boedtian genealogy: she derived the Ogygian gates of Thébes 
from Ogygus, son of Boedtus (Schol. Apollén. Rhod. iii. 1178), also the Frag 
ments of Korinna in Schneidewin’s edition, fr. 2. p. 432. 


ve = SS 


LEGENDS OF THEBES. 257 


Kadmus, Antiopé, Amphién and Zethus, etc., are the most pro- 
minent and most characteristic exploits, next to the siege of Troy, 
of that preéxisting race of heroes who lived in the imagination 
of the historical Hellénes. 

It is not Kadmus, but the brothers Amphién and Zethus, who 
are given to us in the Odyssey as the first founders of Thébes 
and the first builders of its celebrated walls. They are the sons 
of Zeus by Antiopé, daughter of Asépus. The scholiasts who 
desire to reconcile this tale with the more current account of the 
foundation of Thébes by Kadmus, tell us that after the death of 
Amphion and Zethus, Eurymachus, the warlike king of the 
Phlegyx, invaded and ruined the newly-settled town, so that 
Kadmus on arriving was obliged to re-found it.1 But Apollo- 
dorus, and seemingly the older logographers before him, placed 
Kadmus at the top, and inserted the two brothers at a lower 
point in the series. According to them, Bélus and Agendér were 
the sons of Epaphus, son of the Argeian I6, by Libya. Agendr 
went to Pheenicia and there became king: he had for his off- 
epring Kadmus, Pheenix, Kilix, and a daughter Eurépa; though 
in the Iliad Eurépa is called daughter of Pheenix2 Zeus fell in 
love with Eurépa, and assuming the shape of a bull, carried her 
across the sea upon his back from Egpyt to Kréte, where she 
bore to him Minds, Rhadamanthus and Sarpédén. . Two out of 
the three sons sent out by Agendr in search of their lost sister, 
wearied out by a long-protracted as well as fruitless voyage, 
abandoned the idea of returning home: Kilix setiled in Kilikia, 
and Kadmus in Thrace. Thasus, the brother or nephew of 





* Homer, Odyss. xi. 262, and Eustath. ad loc. Compare Schol. ad Iliad. 
xiii. 301. 

? Tliad, xiv. 321. I6 is xepdecoa mpouarup of the Thébans. Eurip. Phe- 
niss. 247-676. 

% Apollodér. ii. 1,3; iii. 1,8. In the Hesiodic poems (ap. Schol. Apoll. 
Rhod. ii. 178), Phoenix was recognized as son of Agenér. Pherekydés also 
described both Pheenix and Kadmus as sons of Agendr (Pherekyd. Fragm. 
40, Didot).. Compare Servius ad. Virgil. Aneid. 1. 338. Pherekydés ex- 
pressly mentioned Kilix (Apollod. ib.). Besides the Eipézeva of Stesicho- 
rus (see Stesichor. Fragm. xy. p. 73, ed. Kleine), there were several other 
ancient poems on the adventures of Europa; one in particular by Eumélus 
(Schol. ad Iliad. vi. 138), which however can hardly be the same as the rd 

VOL. I. 17oc. 


958 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Kadmus, who had accompanied them in the voyage, settled’ nel 
gave name to the island of Phasus. 

Both Herodotus and Euripidés represent Kadmus as an emi- 
grant from Pheenicia, conducting a body of followers in quest ot 
Eurépa. The account of Apollodérus describes him as having 
come originally from Libya or Egypt to Pheenicia: we may 
presume that this was also the statement of the earlier logo- 
graphers Pherekydés and Hellanikus. Condn, who historicizes 
and politicizes the whole legend, seems to have found two differ- 
ent accounts ; one connecting Kadmus with Egypt, another bring- 
ing him from Pheenicia. He tries to melt down the two into 
one, by representing that the Pheenicians, who sent out. Kadmus, 
had acquired great power in Egypt — that the seat of their king- 
dom was the Egyptian Thébes —that Kadmus was despatched, 
under pretence indeed of finding his lost sister, but really on a 
project of conquest — and that the name Thébes, which he gave 
to his new establishment in Boeédtia, was borrowed from Thébes 
in Egypt, his ancestorial seat.! 

Kadmus went from Thrace to Delphi to procure information 
respecting his sister Eurédpa, but the god directed him to take no 
further trouble about her; he was to follow the guidance of a 
cow, and to found a city on the spot where the animal should lie 
down. ‘The condition was realized on the site of Thébes. The 
neighboring fountain Areia was guarded by a fierce dragon, the 
offspring of Arés, who destroyed all the persons sent to fetch 
water. Kadmus killed the dragon, and at the suggestion of 
Athéné sowed his teeth in the earth :. there sprang up at once 
the armed men called the Sparti, among whom he flung stones, 





éxn ta ei¢ Ebpérnyv alluded to by Pausanias (ix. 5, 4). See Wallner de 
Cyclo Epico, p. 57 (Minster 1825). 

2 Condn, Narrat. 37. Perhaps the most remarkable thing of all is the 
tone of unbounded self-confidence with which Conén winds up this tissue 
of uncertified suppositions — ep? pév Kadpov Kat OnBov — obtog 6 
dAndie Adyog: Td dé GAA0 doc Kat yonTeia dKone. 
| ? Stesichor. (Fragm. 16; Kleine) ap. Schol. Eurip. Pheeniss. 680. ‘The 
place where the heifer had ‘td down was still shown in the time - Pausa- 
nias (ix. 12, 1), 

Lysimachus, a lost author who wrote Thebatca, mentioned Eurépa as 
having come with Kadmus to Thébes, and told the story in many other re 
‘spects very differently (Schol Apoll. Rhod. iii. 1179). 


KADMUS AND HIS DAUGHTERS. 259 


and they immediately began to assault each other until all were 
slain except five. Arés, indignant at this slaughter, was about 
to kill Kadmus; but Zeus appeased him, condemning Kadmus 
to an expiatory servitude of eight years, after which he married 
Harmonia, the daughter of Arés and Aphrodité — presenting to 
her the splendid necklace fabricated by the hand of Héphas- 
tos, which had been given by Zeus to Eurépa.! All the gods 
came to the Kadmeia, the citadel of Thébes, to present congrat- 
ulations and gifts at these nuptials, which seem to have been 
hardly less celebrated in the mythical world than those of Péleus 
and Thetis. The issue of the marriage was one son, Polydérus, 
and four daughters, Autonoé, Ind, Semelé and Agavé.2 

From the five who alone survived of the warriors sprung from 
the dragon’s teeth, arose five great families or gentes in Thébes ; 
the oldest and noblest of its inhabitants, coeval with the founda- 
tion of the town. They were called Sparti, and their name 
seems to have given rise, not only to the fable of the sowing of 
the teeth, but also to other etymological narratives.3 

All the four daughters of Kadmus are illustrious in fabulous 
history. Ind, wife of Athamas, the son of Xolus, has already 
been included among the legends of the AXolids. Semelé became 
the mistress of Zeus, and inspired Héré with jealousy. Mis- 
guided by the malicious suggestions of that goddess, she solicited 
Zeus to visit her with all the solemnity and terrors which sur- 





? Apollodor. iii. 4, 1-3. Pherekydés gave this account of the necklace, 
which seems to imply that Kadmus must have found his sister Eurépa. ‘Che 
narrative here given is from Hellanikus ; that of Pherekydés differed from 
it in some respects: compare Hellanik. Fragm. 8 and 9, and Pherekyd. Frag. 
44. The resemblance of this story with that of Jasin and Aétés (see above, 
chap. xiii. p. 237) will strike every one, Itis curious to observe how the 
old logographer Pherekydés explained this analogy in his narrative ; he said 
that Athéné had given half the dragon’s teeth to Kadmus and half to Aétés 
~ (see Schol. Pindar. Isthm. vi. 13). 

® Hesiod, Theogon. 976. Leukothea, the sea-goddess, daughter of Kad 
mus, is mentioned in the Odyssey, v. 334; Dioddr. iv. 2. 

3 Eurip. Pheeniss. 680, with the Scholia; Pherekydés, Fragm. 44; André- 
tion, ap. Schol. Pindar. Isthm. vi. 13. Dionysius (%) called the Sparti an 
ESvo¢ Bowriac (Schol. Pheeniss. 1. ¢.). 

Even in the days of Plutarch, there were persons living who traced their 
descent to the Sparti of Thébes (Plutarch, Ser. Num. Vindict. p 563). 


960 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


rounded him when he approached Héré herself. The god um 
willingly consented, and came in his chariot in the midst of 
thunder and lightning, under which awful accompaniments the 
mortal frame of Semelé perished. Zeus, taking from her the 
child of which she was pregnant, sewed it into his own thigh: 
after the proper interval the child was brought out and born, and 
became the great god Dionysus or Bacchus. Hermés took him 
to Ind and Athamas to receive their protection. Afterwards, 
however, Zeus having transformed him into a kid to conceal him 
from the persecution of Héré, the nymphs of the mountain Nysa 
became his nurses.1 

Autonoé, the third daughter of Kadmus, married the pastoral 
hero or god Aristeas, and was mother of Aktazén, a devoted 
hunter anda favorite companion of the goddess Artemis. She 
however became displeased with him — either because he looked 
into a fountain while she was bathing and saw her naked —or 
according to the legend set forth by the poet Stesichorus, because 
he loved and courted Semelé — or according to Euripidés, be- 
cause he presumptuously vaunted himself as her superior in the 
chase. She transformed him into a stag, so that his own dogs 
set upon and devoured him. The rock upon which Aktexén used 
to sleep when fatigued with the chase, and the spring whose 
transparent waters had too clearly revealed the form of the god- 
dess, were shown to Pausanias near Platea, on the road to 
Megara.? 





? Apollodér. iii. 4, 2-9; Dioddr. iv. 2. 

2 See Apollodér. iii. 4,3; Stesichor. Fragm. xvii. Kleine; Pausan. ix. 2, 
3; Eurip. Bacch. 337; Diodér. iv. 81. The old logographer Akusilens 
eophed Stesichorus. 

Upon this well-known story it is unnecessary to multiply references. I 
shall however briefly notice the remarks made*upon it by Diodérus and by 
Pausanias, as an illustration of the manner in which the literary Greeks of a 
later day dealt with their old national legends. 

Both of them appear implicitly to believe the fact, that Aktawén was 
devoured by his own dogs, but they differ materially in the explanation 
of it. 

Diodérus accepts and vindicates the miraculous interposition of the dis- 
pleased goddess to punish Akts6n, who, according to one story, had boasted 
of his superiority in the chase to Artemis, — according to another story, had 
presumed to solicit the goddess in marriage, emboldened by the great num- 
bers of the feet of animals slain in the chase which he had hung up as offer: 


DIONYSIUS AT THEBES 261 


Azavé, the remaining daughter of Kadmus, married Evhién, 
one of the Sparti. The issue of these nuptials was Pentheus, 
who, when Kadmus became old succeeded him as king of Thébes. 
In his reign Dionysus appeared as a god, the author or discoverer 
of the vine with all its blessings. He had wandered over Asia, 
India and Thrace, at the head of an excited troop of female en- 
thusiasts — communicating and inculcating everywhere the Bac- 
chic ceremonies, and rousing in the minds of women’ that 
impassioned religious emotion which led them to ramble in 
solitary mountains at particular seasons, there to give vent to 
violent fanatical excitement, apart from the men, clothed in fawn- 
skins and armed with the thyrsus. The obtrusion of a male spec- 
tator upon these solemnities was esteemed sacrilegious. Though 
the rites had been rapidly disseminated and fervently welcomed 
in many parts of Thrace, yet there were some places in which 
they had been obstinately resisted and their votaries treated with 
rudeness ; especially by Lykurgus, king of the Edonian Thra- 
cians, upon whom a sharp and exemplary punishment was 
inflicted by Dionysus. 

Thébes was the first city of Greece to which Dionysus came, 





ings in her temple. “Itis not improbable (observes Diodérus) that the god 
dess was angry on both these accounts. For whether Aktzén abused these 
hunting presents so far as to make them the means of gratifying his own 
desires towards one unapproachable in wedlock, or whether he presumed to 
eall himself an abler hunter than her with whom the gods themselves will 
aot compete in this department, —in either case the wrath of the goddess 
against him was just and legitimate (éuoAoyouuévyy kal dixaiay dpynv éoxe 
mpoc abrov  Sedc). With perfect propriety therefore (KaddAov dé xuPavic) 
was he transformed into an animal such as those he had hunted, and torn to 
pieces by the very dogs who had killed them.” (Didot. iv. 80.) 

Pausanias, a man of exemplary piety, and generally less inclined to 
scepticism than Diodérus, thinks the occasion unsuitable for a miracle or 
special interference. Having alluded to the two causes assigned for the dis- 
pleasure of Artemis (they are the two first-mentioned in my text, and dis- 
tinct from the two noticed by Diodérus), he proceeds to say, “ But I believe 
that the dogs of Aktzén went mad, without the interference of the goddess : 
in this state of madness they would have torn in pieces without distinction 
any one whom they met (Paus. ix. 2, 3. éy@ d2 xa? dvev Geodt reiSouat vécov 
Abocav éxiBareiv rod ’Akraiwvog tod¢ xbvac).” He retains the truth of the 
final catastrophe, but rationalizes it, excluding the special intervention of 
Artemis. 


262 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


at the nead of his Asiatic troop of females, to obtain divine hon 

ors and to establish his peculiar rites in his native city. The 
venerable Kadmus, together with his daughters and the prophet 
Teiresias, at once acknowledged the divinity of the new god, and 
began to offer their worship and praise to him along with the 
solemnities which he enjoined. But Pentheus vehemently op- 
posed the new ceremonies, reproving and maltreating the god 
who introduced them: nor was his unbelief at all softened by 
the miracles which Dionysus wrought for his own protection and 
for that of his followers. His mother Agavé, with her sisters. 
and a large body of other women from Thébes, had gone out 
from Thébes to Mount Kitherén to celebrate their solemnities 
under the influence of the Bacchic frenzy. Thither Pentheus 
followed to watch them, and there the punishment due to his 
impiety overtook him. The avenging touch of the god having 
robbed him of his senses, he climbed a tall pine for the purpose 
of overlooking the feminine multitude, who detected him in this 
position, pulled down the tree, and tore him in pieces. Agavé, 
mad and bereft of consciousness, made herself the foremost in 
this assault, and carried back in triumph to Thébes the head of 
her slaughtered son. The aged Kadmus, with his wife Harmo- 
nia, retired among the Illyrians, and at the end of their lives 
were changed into serpents, Zeus permitting them to be trans- 
ferred to the Elysian fields.! 





? Apollod. iii, 5, 3-4; Theocrit. Idyll. xxvi. Eurip. Bacch. passim. Such 
is the tragical plot of this memorable drama. It is a striking proof of the 
deep-seated reverence of the people of Athens for the sanctity of the Bacchie 
ceremonies, that they could have borne the spectacle of Agayé on the stage 
with her dead son’s. head, and. the expressions of triumphant sympathy in 
her action on the part of the Chorus (1168), Maxatp’ "Ayaig! ‘This drama, 
written near the close of the life of Euripidés, and exhibited by his son after 
his death (Schol. Aristoph, Ran. 67), contains passages strongly inculcating 
the necessity of implicit deference to ancestorial authority in matters of re- 
ligion, and favorably contrasting the uninquiring faith of the vulgar with the 
dissenting and inquisitive tendencies of superior minds: see vy. 196; com- 
pare yy. 389 and 422. — 

Oidéy codiLaperda toict dainoouw. 
Tlarpiovg mapadoxac, dc 8 dpndtxac xpévy 
Kexrjue?’, oideic ata xataBarei Adyoc, 
Ovid" Hv 6V dxpov 7d coddv ebpnrat dpévor. 
Such reproofs “ insanientis sapientie” certainly do not fall in with the plot 


PENTHEUS. —LABDAKUS. — LAIUS. — ANTIOPE. 263 


Polydérus and Labdakus successively became kings of Thébes: 
the latter at his death left an infant son, Laius, who was deprived 
of his throne by Lykus. And here we approach the legend of 
Antiopé, Zéthus and Amphién, whom the fabulists insert at this 
point of the Théban series. Antiopé is here the daughter of Nyk- 
teus, the brother of Lykus. She is deflowered by Zeus, and 
then, while pregnant, flies to Epdpeus king of Sikyén: Nykteus 
dying entreats his brother to avenge the injury, and Lykus 
accordingly invades Sikyd6n, defeats and kills Epdpeus, and brings 
- back Antiopé prisoner to Thébes. In her way thither, in a cave 
near Eleutherz, which was shown to Pausanias,! she is delivered 
of the twin sons of Zeus — Amphién and Zéthus —who, exposed 
to perish, are taken up and nourished by a shepherd, and pass 
their youth amidst herdsmen, ignorant of their lofty descent. 

Antiopé is conveyed to Thébes, where, after undergoing a long 
persecution from Lykus and his cruel wife Dirké, she at length 
escapes, and takes refuge in the pastoral dwelling of her sons, 
now grown to manhood. Dirké pursues and requires her to be 
delivered up ; but the sons recognize and protect their mother, 
taking an ample reyenge upon her persecutors. Lykus is slain, 
and Dirké is dragged to death, tied to the horns of a bull.? 





of the drama itself, in which Pentheus appears as a Conservative, resisting 
the introduction of the new religious rites.. Taken in conjunction with the 
emphatic and submissive piety which reigns through the drama, they coun- 
tenance the supposition of Tyrwhitt, that Euripidés was anxious to repel 
the imputations, so often made against him, of commerce with the philoso- 
phers and participation in sundry heretical opinions. 

Pacuvius in his Pentheus seems to have closely copied Euripidés ; see 
Servius ad Virg. Aneid. iv. 469. 

_ The old Thespis had composed a tragedy on the subject. of Pentheus; 
Suidas, Oéoric ; also Adschylus; compare his Eumenidés, 25. 

According to Apollodérus (iii. 5, 5), Labdakus also perished in a similar 
way to Pentheus, and from the like impiety, — éxeivw gpovav maparAqjaca. 

? Pausan. i, 38, 9. 

? For the adventures of Antiopé and her sons, see Apollodor. iii. 5; 
Pausan. ii. 6,2; ix. 5, 2. 

The narrative given respecting Epdpeus in the ancient Cyprian verses 
seems to have been very different from this, as far as we can judge from the 
brief notice in Proclus’s Argument, — d¢ "Exurede o¥eipac tiv AvKotpyov 
(Atxov) yuvaixa éeropit7Fn : it approaches more nearly to the story given 
in the seventh fable of Hyginus, and followed by Propertius (iii. 15); the 


264 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Amphi6én and Zéthus, having banished Laius, become kings of 
Tnébes. The former, taught by Hermés, and possessing exquis« 
ite skill on the lyre, employs it in fortifying the city, the stones 
of the walls arranging themselves spontaneously in obedience to — 
the rhythm of his song.! 

Zéthus marries Aéd6n, who, in the dark and under a fatal mis- 
take, kills her son Itylus: she is transformed intoa nightingale, 
while Zéthus dies of grief? Amphidn becomes the husband of 
Niobé, daughter of Tantalus, and the father of a numerous off- 
spring, the complete extinction of which by the hands of seed 
and Artemis has already been recounted in these pages. / 

Here ends the legend of the beautiful Antiopé and her twin 
sons — the rude and unpolished, but energetic, Zéthus — and the 
refined and amiable, but dreamy, Amphién. For so Euripidés, 
in the drama of Antiopé unfortunately lost, presented the twe 





eighth fable of Hyginus contains the tale of Antiopé as given by ec 
and Ennius. The story of Pausanias differs from both. 

The Scholiast ad Apollon. Rhod. i. 735. says that there were twe persons 
named Antiopé; one, daughter of Asdpus, the other, daughter of Nykteus. 
Pausanias is content with supposing one only, really the daughter of Nyk- 
teus, but there was a $77 that she was daughter of Asdpus (ii. 6, 2). Asius 
made Antiopé daughter of Asdépus, and mother (both by Zeus and by Epé- 
peus: such a junction of divine and human paternity is of common occur 
rence in the Greek legends) of Zéthus and Amphi6n (ap. Paus. 1. ¢.). 

The contradictory versions of the story are brought together, though no? 
very perfectly, in Sterk’s Essay De Labdacidarum Historia, p. 38-43 (Ley- 
den, 1829). 

! This story about the lyre of Amphidn is not noticed in Homer, but it 
was narrated in the ancient én é¢ Eipémnv which Pausanias had read: the 
wild beasts as well as the stones were obedient to his strains (Paus. ix. 5, 4). 
Pherekydés also recounted it (Pherekyd. Fragm. 102, Didot). ‘The tablet 
of inscription (’Avzypagy) at Sikyén recognized Amphién as the first com 
poser of poetry and harp-music (Plutarch, de Music, c. 3. p. 1132). 

* The tale of the wife and son of Zéthus is as old as the Odyssey (xix. 
525). Pausanias adds the statement that Zéthus died of grief (ix. 5, 5; 
Pherekydés, Fragm. 102, Did.). Pausanias, however, as well as Apollodé- 
rus, tells us that Zéthus married Thébé, from whom the name Thébes was 
given to the city. To reconcile the conflicting pretensions of Zéthus and 
Amphidén with those of Kadmus, as founders of Thébes, Pausanias supposes 
that the latter was the original settler of the hill of the Kadmeia, while the 
two former extended the settlement to the lower city (ix. 5, 1-3). 


LAIUS AND CDIPUS. 265 


brothers, in affectionate union as well as in striking contrast.! It 
is evident that the whole story stood originally quite apart from 
the Kadmeian family, and so the rudiments of it yet stand in 
the Odyssey ; but the logographers, by their ordinary connecting 
artifices, have opened a vacant place for it in the descending se- 
ries of Théban mythes. And they have here proceeded in a 
manner not usual with them. For whereas they are generally 
fond of multiplying entities, and supposing different historical 
personages of the same name, in order to introduce an apparent 
smoothness in the chronology — they have here blended into one 
person Amphién the son of Antiopé and Amphién the father of 
Chloris, who seem clearly distinguished from each other in the 
Odyssey. They have further assigned to the same person all the 
circumstances of the legend of Niobé, which seems to have been 
originally framed quite apart from the sons of Antiopé. 
Amphion and Zéthus being removed, Laius became king of 
Thébes. With him commences the ever-celebrated series of ad- 
ventures of Cidipus and his family. Laius forewarned by the 
oracle that any son whom he might beget would kill him, caused 
CEdipus as soon as he was born to be exposed on Mount Kithe- 
ron. Here the herdsmen of Polybus king of Corinth acciden- 
tally found him and conveyed him to their master, who brought 
him up as his own child. In spite of the kindest treatment, 
however, Cidipus when he grew up found himself exposed to 
taunts on the score of his unknown parentage, and went to Delphi 
to inquire of the god the name of his real father. He received 
for answer an admonition not to go back to his country ; if he did 
so, it was his destiny to kill his father and become the husband of 
his mother. Knowing no other country but Corinth, he accord- 
ingly determined to keep away from that city, and quitted Delphi 
by the road towards Bootia and Phékis. At the exact spot 





1 See Valckenaer. Diatribé in Eurip. Relig. cap. 7, p. 58; Welcker, 
Griechisch. Tragé6d. ii. p. 811. There is a striking resemblance between the 
Antiopé of Euripidés and the Tyré of Sophoklés in many points. 

Plato in his Gorgias has preserved a few fragments, and a tolerably clear 
general idea of the characters of Zéthus and Amphién (Gorg. 90-92); see 
also Horat. Epist. i. 18, 42. : 

Both Livius and Pacuvius had tragedies on the scheme of this of Eurya 
lés, the former seemirgly a translation. 

VOL. I. 12 


266 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


where the roads leading to these two countries forked, he met 
Laius in a chariot drawn by mules, when the insolence of one of 
the attendants brought on an angry quarrel, in which C&dipus 
killed Laius, not knowing him to be hisfather.. The exact 
place where this event happened, called the Divided Way!, was 
memorable in the eyes of all literary Greeks, and is a 
adverted to by Pausanias in his periegesis. 

On the death of Laius, Kreén, the brother of Jokasta, suc 
ceeded to the kingdom of Thébes. At this time the country was 
under the displeasure of the gods, and was vexed by a terrible 
monster, with the face of a woman, the wings of a bird, and the 
tail of a lion, called the Sphinx? — sent by the wrath of Héré 
and occupying the neighboring mountain of Phikium. The 
Sphinx had learned from the Muses a riddle, which she proposed 
to the Thébans to resolve: on every occasion of failure she took 
away one of the citizens and ate him up. Still no person could 
solve the riddle; and so great was the suffering occasioned, that 
Kreon was obliged to offer both the crown and the nuptials of 
his sister Jokasta to any one who could achieve the salvation of 
the city. At this juncture Cédipus arrived and solved the rid- 
dle: upon which the Sphinx immediately threw herself from the 
acropolis and disappeared. As a recompense for this service, 
QC&dipus was made king of Thébes, and married Jokasta, not 
aware that she was his mother. 

These main tragical circumstances —that C&dipus had ig- 
norantly killed his father and married his mother —belong to 
the oldest form of the legend as it stands in the Odyssey. -The ~ 
gods (itis added in that poem) quickly made the facts known to 
mankind. Epikasta (so Jokasta is here called) in an agony of 
sorrow hanged herself: C&dipus remained king of the Kad- 
meians, but underwent many and great miseries, such as the 





1 See the description of the locality in K. O. Miiller (Orchomenos, e¢. i. p. 
37 

Inve tombs of Laius and his attendant were still seen there in the days of 
Pausanias (x. 5, 2). 

* Apollodér. iii. 5,8. An author named Lykus, in his work entitled The- 
batca, ascribed this visitation to the anger of Dionysus (Schol. Hesiod, 
Theogon. 326). The Sphinx (or Phiz, from the Boedtian Mount Phikiam) 
is as old as the Hesiodic Theogony, — ix’ dAdnv réxe, Kaduetorow bAcdpev 
(Theog. 326). 


ADVENTURES OF €DIPUS. 267 


Erinnyes, who avenge an injured mother, inflict! A passage in 
the Iliad implies that he died at Thébes, since it mentions tle 
funeral games which were celebrated there in honor of him. 
His misfortunes were recounted by Nestér, in the old Cyprian 
verses, among the stories of aforetime.? A fatal curse hung both 
upon himself and upon his children, Eteoklés, Polynikés, Anti- 
goné and Isméné. According to that narrative which the Atti¢ 
tragedians have rendered universally current, they were his. chil: 
dren by Jokasta, the disclosure of her true relationship to him 
haying been very long deferred. But the ancient epic called 
Cidipodia, treading more closely in the footsteps of Homer, rep- 
resented him as having after her death married a second wife, 
Kuryganeia, by whom the four children -were born to him: and 
the painter Onatas adopted this story in preference to that of 
Sophoklés.? 


' Odyss. xi. 270. Odysseus, describing what he saw in the under-world, 
says, — 





Myrépa t’ Oidtrédao idov, kadjv "Excedorny, 

"H péya épyov Epefev aidpetnot viato, 

Tyyauévyn g viei- 6 0 bv marép’ tSevapitac 

Tijyev ddap & Gvarvora Seol Sécav dvdparocee. 

"AAW 6 wév Ev O78y rodunpaty dryea Tacxwr, 

Kadzeiov jvacce, Sedv bAdac did Bovade - 

‘H & &8n el¢ Aiddo xvAdprao Kpatepoio 

‘Apapévn Bpdxov aimdy ag’ inpqdoto pera9pov, 

"Q Gyei oxopévg: TO 0 GAyea KaAjur’ bricow 

TloAAa pad’, boca te untpd¢ "Epivvtec éxtedéovatv. 

fliad, xxiii. 680, with the scholiast who cites Hesiod. Proclus, Argum 

ad Cypria, ap. Dantzer, Fragm. Epic. Gree. p. 10. Néorwp 68 év rapexSaoe 
Oinyeitat...... Kal Ta Trept Oidirovr, ete. 

_3 Pausan, ix. 5,5. Compare the narrative from Peisander in Schol. ad 
Eurip. Phoeniss. 1773; where, however, the blindness of CEdipus seems to 
be unconsciously interpolated out of the tragedians. Inthe old narrative 
of the Cyclic Thébais, GEdipus does not seem to be represented as blind 
(Leutsch, Thebaidis Cyclici Reliquie, Gotting. 1830, p. 42). 

Pherekydés (ap. Schol. Eurip. Pheeniss. 52) tells us that Gidipus had three 
children. by Jokasta, who were all killed by Erginus and the Minyx (this 
must refer to incidents in the old poems which we cannot now recover) ; 
then the four celebrated children by Euryganeia; lastly, that he married ¢ 
third wife, Astymedusa.. Apollodérus. follows the narrative of the trage- 
dians, but alludes to the different version about Euryganeia, — eio? 0’ of ¢aow, 
ete. (iii. 5, 8). 

Hellanikus (ap. Schol. Eur. Pheeniss. 59) mentioned tke self-inflicted blind 


268 HISTORY OF GREECE 


The disputes of Eteoklés and Polynikés for the throne of their 
father gave occasion not only to a series of tragical family inei- 
dents, but also to one of the great quasi-historical events of legen- 
dary Greece —the two sieges of Thébes by Adrastus, king of 
Argos. The two ancient epic poems called the Thébais and the 
Epigoni (if indeed both were not parts of one very comprehen- 
sive poem) detailed these events at great length, and as it appears, 
with distinguished poetical merit; for Pausanias pronounces the 
Cyclic Thébais (so it was called by the subsequent critics to dis- 
tinguish it from the more modern Thébais of Antimachus) infe- 
rior only to the Iliad and Odyssey; and the ancient elegiac poet 
Kallinus treated it as an’ Homeric composition.! Of this once- 
valued poem we unfortunately possess nothing but a few scanty 
fragments. The leading points of the legend are briefly glanced 
at in the Iliad; but our knowledge of the details is chiefly derived 
from the Attic tragedians, who transformed the narratives of their 
predecessors at pleasure, and whose popularity constantly eclips- 
ed and obliterated the ancient version. Antimachus of Kolophén, 
contemporary with Euripidés, in his long epic, probably took no 
less liberties with the old narrative. His Thébaid never became 
generally popular, but it exhibited marks of study and elabora- 
tion which recommended it to the esteem of the Alexandrine 
critics, and probably contributed to discredit in their eyes the old 
cyclic poem. 

The logographers, who gave a continuous history of this siege 
of Thébes, had at least three preéxisting epic poems — the Thé- 
bias, the C&dipodia, and the Alkmzoénis,— from which they 





ness of CEdipus; but it seems doubtful whether this circumstance was inclu- 
ded in the narrative of Pherekydés. 

1 Pausan, ix.9.38. "Eoindy 08 é¢ tov méAeuov TodTov Kal éxn, OnGaic¢ Ta 
d& én tadta KadaAivoc, adixdpevog abtov é¢ prpjunv, tonoev “Ounpov Tov 
moijoavra eivat. Kadaive dé roAdoi te kat aft0t Adyou Kara Taita éyvwoap * 
éy® 08 Thy rotgow Tabrnv pera ye "Ida Kat Ta Exn Tad é¢ ’Odvecéa ératvd 
padora, The name in the text of Pausanias stands Kadaivoc, an unknown 
person: most of the critics recognize the propriety of substituting KaAAivoe, 
and Leutsch and Welcker have given very sufficient reasons for doing so. 

The 'Audiapew eedacia é¢ O7Bac, alluded to in the pseudo-Herodotean 
ree of Homer, seems to ts the description of a special passage in this Thé- 

is 


SIEGES OF THEBES. 269 


could borrow. The subject was also handled in some of the He- 
siodic poems, but we do not know to what extent.!. The Thébais 
was composed more in honor of Argos than of Thébes, as the 
first line of it, one of the few fragments still preserved, beto 
kens.2 


SIEGES OF THEBES. 


The legend, about to recount fraternal dissension of the most 
implacable kind, comprehending in its results not only the imme- 
diate relations of the infuriated brothers, but many chosen com- 
panions of the heroic race along with them, takes its start from 
the paternal curse of C&dipus, which overhangs and determines 
all the gloomy sequel. 

CEdipus, though king of Thébes and father of four children 
by Euryganeia (according to the C&dipodia), has become the de- 
voted victim of the Erinnyes, in consequence of the self-inflicted 
death of his mother, which he has unconsciously caused, as well 
as of his unintentional parricide. Though he had long forsworn 
the use of all the ornaments and luxuries which his father had in- 
herited from his kingly progenitors, yet when through age he had 
come to be dependent upon his two sons, Polynikés one day broke 
through this interdict, and set before him the silver table and the 
splendid wine-cup of Kadmus, which Laius had always been ac- 
customed to employ. The old king had no sooner seen these 
precious appendages of the regal life of his father, than his mind 
was overrun by a calamitous phrenzy, and he imprecated terrible 
curses on his sons, predicting that there would be bitter and end- 
less warfare between them. The goddess Erinnys heard and 
heeded him ; and he repeated the curse again on another occasion, 
when his sons, who had always been accustomed to send to him 
the shoulder of the victims sacrificed on the altar, caused the but- 





1 Hesiod, ap. Schol. Iliad. xxiii. 680, which passage does not seem to me 
so much at variance with the incidents stated in other poets as Leutsch 
imagines. 

. *"Apyoc decde, Sed, woAvdiyniov, Evdev dvaxreg (see Leutsch, ib. ¢. 4. p 
29). 


270 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


tock to be served to him in place of it.1 He resented this as an 
insult, and prayed the gods that they might perish each by the 
hand of the other. Throughout the tragedians as well as in the 
old epic, the paternal curse, springing immediately from the mis- 
guided CEdipus himself, but remotely from the parricide and 
incest with which he has tainted his breed, is seen to domineer 
over the course of events — the Erinnys who executes that curse 
being the irresistible, though concealed, agent. Aischylus not 
only preserves the fatal efficiency of the paternal curse, but even 
briefly glances at the causes assigned for it in the Thébais, with- 
out superadding any new motives. In the judgment of Sopho- 
klés, or of his audience, the conception of a father cursing his 
sons upon such apparently trifling grounds was odious; and that 
great poet introduced many aggravating circumstances, describing 
the old blind father as having been barbarously turned out of 
doors by his sons to wander abroad in exile and poverty. Though 
by this change he rendered his poem more coherent and self- 
justifying, yet he departed, from the spirit of the old legend, 





? Fragm. of the Thébats, ap. Athene. xii. p.465, dri ob wapéOnKav éxrra- 
uara & arnyopebKet, Aéywv obTwe. 
Adbrdp 6 dioyévne jpwc Savbdc¢ Todvvetane 
IIpara piv Oldirods xadjv rapédnke tpamefav 
*Apyvpénv Kaduoto Sedppovocg: abrap érerta 
Xpiceov EuTrAncev Kadodv dérac Hdeog olvov- 
Airap 57 o¢ ¢paodn napakeipeva matpdc éoio 
Tiujevra yépa, uéya of kaxdv turece Supd. 
Alia 62 matotv éotor per’ dudoréporow émapag 
*Apyadéac hparo: Sedv 0? ob Advav’ "Epiwvviv + 
‘Qe od of marp@a y’ evi giAbryTe dacawTo, 
Elev 6’ dugorépote ale? wéAeuoi re wayai Te. 
See Leutsch, Thebaid. Cycl. Reliq, p. 38. 
The other fragment frcm the same Thébats is cited by the Schol. ad Rowh 
dip. Colon. 1378.— 
"Ioxtov O¢ évonoe, yapual Barer, elxé te piSov: 
*Q pot éyd, maidég pot dverdeiovtec Exeuipav. 
Evxro Avi 3actani Kat dAdo ddavaérowo, 
Xepotv bn’ dAApirwv xataBjuevac "Aidog iow. 
Ta d rapardAjota tH éxoroig kat Aloyvioc év roic "Extra éxt O7Bac. In 
spite of the protest of Schutz, in his note, I think that the scholiast has un- 


derstood the words éricorog rpogac (Sept. ad Theb. 787) in their plain and 
just meaning. 


ADRASTUS OF ARGOS. 271 


according to which Cdipus has contracted by his unconscious 
misdeeds an incurable taint destined to pass onward to his progeny. 
iis mind is alienated, and he curses them, not because he has 
suffered seriously by their guilt, but because he is made the blind 
instrument of an avenging Erinnys for the ruin of the house of 
Laius.1 , 
After the death of Cidipus and the celebration of his funeral 
games, at which amongst others, Argeia, daughter of Adrastus 
(afterwards the wife of Polynikés), was present, his two sons 
soon quarrelled respecting the succession. The circumstances 
are differently related; but it appears that, according to the orig- 
inal narrative, the wrong and injustice was on the part of Poly- 
nikés, who, however, was obliged to leave Thébes and to seek 
shelter with Adrastus, king of Argos. Here he met Tydeus, a 
fugitive, at the same time, from A®télia: it was dark when they 
arrived, and.a broil ensued between the two exiles, but Adrastus 
came out and parted them. He had been enjoined by an oracle 
to give his two daughters in marriage to a lion and a boar, and 
he thought this occasion had now arrived, inasmuch as one of the 
combatants carried on his shield a lion, the other a boar. He 
accordingly gave Deipylé in marriage to Tydeus, and Argeia to 
Polynikés : moreover, he resolved to restore by armed resistance 
both his sons-in-law to their respective countries.3 





? The curses of Cidipus are very frequently and emphatically dwelt upon 
both by Aéschylus and Sophoklés (Sept. ad Theb. 70-586, 655-697, etc. ; 
CEdip. Colon. 1293-1378). The former continues the same point of view 
as the Thébats, when he mentions — 

oars Tae repudipove 
Karépac BAapippovoc Oldixbda (727) ; 
or, Adyou 7’ dvo.a Kal dpevv’Epivvic (Soph. Antig. 584). 

The Scholiast on Sophoklés (Ed. Col. 1378) treats the cause assigned by 
the ancient Thébats for the curse vented by C&dipus as trivial and ludicrous. 

The Mgeids at Sparta, who traced their descent to Kadmus, suffered from 
terrible maladies which destroyed the lives of their children; an oracle di- 
rected them to appease the Erinnyes of Laius and C£dipus by erecting a 
temple, upon which the maladies speedily ceased (Herodot. iv.). 

? Hesiod. ap. Schol. Iliad. xxiii. 680. 

3 Apollodor. iii. 5,9; Hygin. f. 69; 2éschyl. Sept. ad Theb. 573. Hyginus 
says that Polynikés came clothed in the skin of a lion, and Tydeus in that 
of a bear; perhaps after Antimachus, who said that Tydeus had been brought 


272 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


On proposing the expedition to the Argeian chiefs around him 
he found most of them willing auxiliaries; but Amphiaraéus— 
formerly his bitter opponent, but now reconciled to him, and 
husband of his sister Eriphylé—strongly opposed him.t He 
denounced the enterprise as unjust and contrary to the will of 
the gods. Again, being of a prophetic stock, descended from 
Melampus, he foretold the certain death both of himself and of 
the principal leaders, should they involve themselves as accom- 
plices in the mad violence of Tydeus or the criminal ambition of 
Polynikés. Amphiardaus, already distinguished both in the Kaly- 
dénian boar-hunt and in the funeral games of Pelias, was in the 
Théban war the most conspicuous of all the heroes, and absolutely 
indispensable to its success. But his reluctance to engage in it 
was invincible, nor was it. possible to prevail upon him except 
through the influence of his wife Eriphylé. Polynikés, having 
brought with him from Thébes the splendid robe and necklace 
given by the gods to Harmonia on her marriage with Kadmus, 
offered it as a bribe to Eriphylé; on condition that she would 
influence the determination of Amphiaraus. The sordid wife, 
seduced by so matchless a present, betrayed the lurking-place of 
her husband, and involved him in the fatal expedition.2, Amphia- 
raus, reluctantly dragged forth, and foreknowing the disastrous 
issue of the expedition both to himself and to his associates, 
addressed his last injunctions, at the moment of mounting his 
chariot, to his sons Alkmzén and Amphilochus, commanding 
Alkmzx6n to avenge his approaching death by killing the venal 
Eriphylé, and by undertaking a second expedition against Thébes. 

The Attic dramatists describe this expedition as having been 
conducted by seven chiefs, one to each of the seven celebrated 
gates of Thébes. But the Cyclic Thébais gave to it a much 





up by swineherds (Antimach. Fragm. 27, ed. Diintzer; ap. Schol. Iliad. iv. 
400). Very probably, however, the old Thébais compared Tydeus and Poly- 
nikés to a lion anda boar, on account of their courage and fierceness; a 
simile quite in the Homeric character. Mnaseas gave the words of the oracle 
{1p. Schol. Eurip. Pheeniss, 411). 

1 See Pindar, Nem. ix. 30, with the instructive Scholium 

* Apollodér. iii. 6,2. The treachery of “the hateful Eriphylé” is noticed 
in the Odyssey, xi. 327: Odysseus sees her in the under-world along with 
the many wives and daughters of the heroes. 


MARCH OF ADRASTUS AGAINST THEBES. 273 


more comprehensive character, mentioning auxiliaries from 
Arcadia, Messéné, and various parts of Peloponnésus;! and the 
application of Tydeus and Polynikés at Mykéne in the course of 
their circuit made to collect allies, is mentioned in the Iliad. 
They were well received at Mykéne; but the warning signals 
given by the gods were so terrible that no Mykenxan could 
venture to accompany them.2 The seven principal chiefs how- 
ever were Adrastus, Amphiaraus, Kapaneus, Hippomedén, Par- 
thenopwus, Tydeus and Polynikés3 When the army had 
advanced as far as the river Asépus,a halt was made for sacrifice 
and banquet; while Tydeus was sent to Thébes as envoy to 
demand the restoration of Polynikés to his rights. His demand 
was refused; but finding the chief Kadmeians assembled at the 
banquet in the house of Eteoklés, he challenged them all to con- 
tend with him in boxing or wrestling. So efficacious was the aid 
of the goddess Athéné that he overcame them all; and the Kad- 
meians were so indignant at their defeat, that they placed an 
ambuscade of fifty men to intercept him in his way back to the 
army. All of them perished by the hand of this warrior, small 
in stature and of few words, but desperate and irresistible in the 
fight. One alone was spared, Mon, in consequence of special 
signals from the gods.4 

The Kadmeians, assisted by their allies the Phdkians and the 
Phlegyz, marched out to resist the invaders, and fought a battle 





1 Pausan. ii. 20,4; ix. 9,1. His testimony to this, as he had read and 
admired the Cyclic Thébais, seems quite sufficient, in spite of the opinion ot 
Welcker to the contrary (Aischylische Trilogie. p. 375). 

? Tliad, iv. 376. 

3 There are differences in respect to the names of the seven: ischylus 
(Sept. ad Theb. 461) leaves out Adrastus as one of the seven, and includes 
Eteoklus instead of him; others left out Tydeus and Polynikés, and inserted 
Eteoklus and Mekisteus (Apollodér. iii. 6,3). Antimachus, in his poetical 
Thébats, called Parthenopeus an Argeian, not an Arcadian (Schol. ad 
Zéschyl. Sept. ad. Theb. 532). 

4 Tliad, iv. 381-400, with the Schol. The first celebration of the Nemean 
games is connected with this march of the army of Adrastus against Thébes- 
they were celebrated in honor of Archemorus, the infant son of Lykurgus, 
who had beea killed by a serpent while his nurse Hypsipylé went to show the 
fountain to the thirsty Argeian chiefs (Apollod. iii. 6,4; Schol. ad Pindar 
Nem. 1) 

VOL. I. 12* 180¢ 


274 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


near tue Isménian hill, in which they were defeated and forced to 
retire within the walls. The prophet Teiresias acquainted them 
that if Meneekeus, son of Kreén, would offer himself as a victim 
to Arés, victory would be assured to Thébes. The generous 
youth, as soon as he learnt that his life was to be the price of 
safety to his country, went and slew himself before the gates. 
The heroes along with Adrastus now commenced. a vigorous 
attack upon the town, each of the seven selecting one of the gates 
to assault.. The contest was long and strenuously maintained 

but the devotion of Mencekeus had procured for the Thébans the 
protection of the gods. Parthenopzus was killed with a stone by 
Periklymenus; and when the furious Kapaneus, having planted 
a scaling-ladder, had mounted the walls, he was smitten by a 
thunderbolt from Zeus and cast down dead upon the earth. This 
event struck terror into the Argeians, and Adrastus called back 
his troops from the attack. The Thébans now sallied forth to 
pursue them, when Eteoklés, arresting the battle, proposed to 
decide the controversy by single combat with his brother. The 
challenge, eagerly accepted by Polynikés, was agreed to by 
Adrastus: a single combat ensued between the two brothers, in 
which both were exasperated to fury and both ultimately slain by 
each other’s hand. This equal termination left the result of the 
general contest still undetermined, and the bulk of the two armies 
renewed the fight. In the sanguinary struggle which ensued the 
sons of Astakus on the Théban side displayed the most conspicu- 
ous and successful valor. One of them,! Melanippus, mortally 
wounded T'ydeus— while two others, Leades and Amphidikus, 
killed Eteoklus and Hippomedén. Amphiarius avenged Tydeus 
by killing Melanippus; but unable to arrest the rout of the army, 





1 The story recounted that the head of Melanippus was brought to Tydeus 
as he was about to expire of his wound, and that he knawed it with his teeth, 
a story touched upon by Sophoklés (apud Herodian. in Rhetor. Gree. t. viii. 
p- 601, Walz.). 

The lyric poet Bacchylidés (ap. Schol. Aristoph. Aves, 1535) seems to have 
handled the story even earlier than Sophoklés. 

We find the same allegation embodied in charges against real historical 
men: the invective of Montanus against Aquilius Regulus, at the beginning 
of the reign of Vespasian, affirmed, “ datam interfectori Pisonis pecuniam @ 
Kegulo, appetitumque morsu Pisonis cay *” ‘Tacit. Hist. iv. 42). 


AMPHIARAUS. 275 


he fled with the rest, closely pursued by Periklymenus. The 
latter was about to pierce him with his spear, when the beneficence 
of Zeus rescued him from this disgrace — miraculously opening 
the earth under him, so that Amphiariius with his chariot and 
horses was received unscathed into her bosom.! The exact spot 
where this memorable incident happened was indicated by a se- 
pulchral building, and shown by the Thébans down to the days of 
Pausanias — its sanctity being attested by the fact, that no animal 
would consent to touch the herbage which grew within the sacred 
inclosure. Amphiaraus, rendered immortal by Zeus, was wor- 
shipped as a god at Argos, at Thébes and at Orépus — and for 
many centuries gave answers at his oracle to the questions of the 
pious applicant.? 





' Apollodor. iii. 6,8. Pindar, Olymp. vi. 11; Nem. ix. 138-27. Pausan. 
1x, 8, 2; 18,,.2-4. 

Euripidés, in the Phoenissz (1122 segq.), describes the battle generally ; sce 
also Ausch.-S. Th. 392. It appears by Pausanias that the Thébans had 
poems or legends of their own, relative to this war: they dissented in various 
points from the Cyclic Thébais (ix. 18, 4). The Thébais said that Perikly- 
menus had killed Parthenoprus; the Thébans assigned this exploit to 
Asphodikus, a warrior not commemorated by any of the poets known to us. 

The village of Harma, between Tanagra and Mykaléssus, was affirmed by 
some to have been the spot where Amphiarius closed his life (Strabo, ix. p 
404): Sophoklés placed the scene at the Amphiarwium near Orépus (ap 
Strabon. ix. p. 399). 

? Pindar, Olymp. vi. 16. “Ezra & émeita mvpdv véxpwv tedecdévtwr 
Tadaiovidag Eimev tv O7nBator torodtov te éxog: Tlotéw orpariae d¢9aApdv 
éude ’Auddrepor, pavtiv 7 dyaddv kat dovp? paxyeoSat, 

The scholiast affirms that these last expressions are borrowed by Pindaa 
from the Cyclic Thébats. 

The temple of Amphiarius (Pausan. ii. 23, 2), his oracle, seems to have 
been inferior in estimation only to that of Delphi (Herodot. i. 52; Pausan. i. 
84; Cicero, Divin.i. 40). Croesus sent a rich present to Amphiarius, rv06- 
pevoc abrod Thy Te dpetiy Kal tiv ma9nv (Herod. |. c); a striking proof how 
these interesting legends were recounted and believed as genuine historical 
facts. Other adventures of Amphiariius in the expedition against Thébes 
were commemorated in the carvings on the Thronus at Amykle (Pausan. 
iii. 18, 4). 

Eschylus (Sept. Theb. 611) seems to enter into the Théban view, doubt- 
less highly respectful towards Amphiarius, when he places in the mouth of 
the Kadmeian king Eteoklés such high encomiums on Amphiarius, and se 
marked a contrast with the other chiefs from Argos. 


276 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Adrastus, thus deprived of the prophet and warrior whem he 
regarded as “the eye of his army,” and having seen the other 
chiefs killed in the disastrous fight, was forced to take flight sin- 
gly, and was preserved by the matchless swiftness of his horse 
Areién, the offspring of Poseidéns He reached Argos on his 
return, bringing with him nothing except “ his garments of woe 
and his black-maned steed.”! 

Kreén, father of the heroic youth Menckeus, succeeding to 
the administration of Thébes after the death of the two hostile 
brothers and the repulse of Adrastus, caused Eteoklés to be 
buried with distinguished honor, but cast out ignominiously the 
body of Polynikés as a traitor to his country, forbidding every 
one on pain of death to consign it to the tomb. He likewise 
refused permission to Adrastus to inter the bodies of his fallen 
comrades. This proceeding, so offensive to Grecian feeling, gave 
rise to two further tales; one of them at least of the highest 
pathos and interest. Antigoné, the sister of Polynikés, heard 
with indignation the revolting edict consigning her brother’s body 
to the dogs and vultures, and depriving it of those rites which 
were considered essential to the repose of the dead. Unmoved 
by the dissuading counsel of an affectionate but timid sister, and 
unable to procure assistance, she determined to brave the hazard 
and to bury the body with her own hands. She was detected in 
the act; and Kredén, though forewarned by Teiresias of the con- 
sequences, gave orders that she should be buried alive, as having 
deliberately set at naught the solemn edict of the city. His son 
Hzmon, to whom she was engaged to be married, in vain inter- 
ceded for her life. In an agony of despair he slew himself in 
the sepulchre to which the living Antigoné had been consigned; 





? Pausan. viii. 25, 5, from the Cyclic Thébats, Eljuara Avypd dépwv ode 
"Apeiovt kvavoyairy; also Apollodor. iii. 6, 8. 

The celebrity of the horse Areién was extolled in the Iliad (xxiii. 346), 
in the Cyclic Thébats, and also in the Thébais of Antimachus (Pausan. 1. 
c.): by the Arcadians of Thelpusia he was said to be the offspring of Démé- 
tér by Poseidén, —he, and a daughter whose name Pausanias will not com- 
municate to the uninitiated (7¢ Td dvoua éc dredéoroue Aéyewv od vopilover, 
Lc.). A different story is in the Schol. Iliad. xxiii. 346; and in Antimach. 
us, who affirmed that “ Gea herself had produced him, as a wonder to mor 
tal men” ‘see Antimach. Frag. 16. p. 102; Epic. Gree. Frag. ed. Diintzer), 


SEPULTURE OF THE CHIEFS 277 


and his mother Eurydiké, the wife of Kren, inceasolable for his 
death, perished by her own hand. And thus the new light which 
seemed to be springing up over the last remaining scion of the 
devoted family of Cidipus, is extinguished amidst gloom and 
horrors — which overshadowed also the house and dynasty of 
Kreén.! 

The other tale stands more apart from the original legend, 
and seems to have had its origin in the patriotic pride of the 
Athenians. Adrastus, unable to obtain permission from the Thé- 
bans to inter the fallen chieftains, presented himself in suppliant 
guise, accompanied by their disconsolate mothers, to Théseus at 
Eleusis. He implored the Athenian warrior to extort from the 
perverse Thébans that last melancholy privilege which no decent 
or pious Greeks ever thought of withholding, and thus to stand 
forth as the champion of Grecian public morality in one of its 
most essential points, not less than of the rights of the subterra- 
nean gods. ‘The Thébans obstinately persisting in their refusal, 
Théseus undertook an expedition against their city, vanquished 
them in the field, and compelled them by force of arms to permit 
the sepulture of their fallen enemies. ‘This chivalrous interposi- 
tion, celebrated in one of the preserved dramas of Euripidés, 
formed a subject of glorious recollection to the Athenians through 
out the historical age: their orators dwelt upon it in terms of 
animated panegyric; and it seems to have been accepted as a 
real fact of the past time, with not less implicit conviction than 
the battle of Marathén.2 But the Thébans, though equally per- 
suaded of the truth of the main story, dissented from the Athe- 
nian version of it, maintaining that they had given up the bodies 
for sepulture voluntarily and of their own accord. The tomb of 





‘1 Sophokl. Antigon. 581. Niv yap écyarac imip ‘Pilac érérato dog tv 
Oidirov dépuote, etc. 

The pathetic tale here briefly recounted forms the subject of this beautiful 
tragedy of Sophoklés, the argument of which is supposed by Boeckh to have 
been borrowed in its primary rudiments from the Cyclic Thébats or the 
CEdipodia (Boeckh, Dissertation appended to his translation of the Anti- 
goné, c. x. p. 146) ; see Apollodér. iii. 7, 1. 

ZEschylus also touches upon the heroism of Antigoné (Sep. Theb. 984). 

* Apollodor. iii..7, 1; Eurip. Supp. passim ; Hefodot. ix. 27; Plato, Menex 
en. ¢. 9; Lysias, Epitaph. ¢ 4; Isokrat. Orat. Panegyr. p 196, Auger 


278. HISTORY OF GREECE. 


the chieftains was shown near Eleusis even im the days of winced 
sanias.! 

A large proportion both éf. the interesting persons and of the 
exalted acts of legendary Greece belongs to the female sex. Nor 
can we on this occasion pass over the name of Evadné, the de- 
voted widow of Kapaneus, who cast herself on the marist: pile 
of her husband and perished.2 

The defeat of the seven chiefs before Thébes was amply aven- 
ged by their sons, again under the guidance of Adrastus : —Aigia- 
leus son of Adrastus, Thersander son of Polynikés, Alkmz6n 
and Amphilochus, sons of Amphiaraus, Diomédés son of Tydeus, 
Sthenelus son of Kapaneus, Promachus son of Parthenopzus, and 
Euryalus son of Mekistheus, joined in this expedition. Though 
all these youthful warriors, called the Epigoni, took part in the 
expedition, the grand and prominent place appears to have been 
occupied by Alkmz6n, son of Amphiarius. Assistance was 
given to them from Corinth and Megara, as well as from Mes- 
séné and Arcadia; while Zeus manifested his favorable disposi- 
tions by signals not to be mistaken.3 At the river Glisas the 
Epigoni were met by the Thébans in arms, and a battle took 
place in which the latter were completely defeated. Laodamas, 
son of Eteoklés, killed AXgialeus, son of Adrastus; but he and 
his army were routed and driven within the walls by the valor 
and energy of Alkmzén. The defeated Kadmeians consulted 
the prophet Teiresias, who informed them that the gods had de- 
clared for their enemies, and that there was no longer any hope 
of successful resistance. By his advice they sent a herald to the 
assailants offering to surrender the town, while they themselves 
conveyed away their wives and children, and fled under the com 





1 Pausan. i. 39, 2, 
2 Eurip. Supplic. 1004-1110. 
3 Homer, Iliad, iv. 406. Sthenelus, the companion of Diomédés and one 
of the Epigoni, says to Agamemnén, — 
‘Hyei¢ rot rarépwr pecy’ dueivoves ebyoue?’ evar 
‘Hyei¢ xat O4B8n¢ dog elAopuev éExrarbio.o, 
Ilavpérepov Aadv dyayévW’ brd retyor “Apevov, 
TlevPopevor repaecor Sedv kat Zynvde dpwyh 
Abroi d ogerépya:y drac8arigow dAovro. 


SECOND EXPEDITION.— THE EPIGONI. 279 


mand of Laodamas to the Illyrians,! upon which tle Epigoni 
entered Thébes, and established Thersander, son of Polynikés, 
on the throne. 

Adrastus, who in the former expedition had been the single 
survivor amongst so many fallen companions, now found himself 
the only exception to the general triumph and joy of the con- 
querors: he had lost his son A®gialeus, and the violent sorrow 
arising from the event prematurely cut short his life. His soft 
voice and persuasive eloquence were proverbial in the ancient 
epic.2 He was worshipped as a hero both at Argos and at Sik- 
yon, but with especial solemnity in the last-mentioned place, 
where his Heréum stood in the public agora, and where his ex- 
ploits as well as his sufferings were celebrated periodically in ly- 
ric tragedies. Melanippus, son of Astakus, the brave defender 
of Thébes, who had slain both Tydeus and Mekistheus, was wor- 
shipped with no less solemnity by the Thébans.? The enmity 
of these two herees rendered it impossible for both of them to be 
worshipped close upon the same spot. Accordingly it came to 
pass during the historical period, about the time of the Solonian 
legislation at Athens, that Kleisthenés, despot of Sikyén, wishing 
to banish the hero Adrastus and abolish the religious solemnities 
celebrated in honor of the latter by the Sikyonians, first applied 
to the Delphian oracle for permission to carry this banishment 
into effect directly and forcibly.. That permission being refused, 
he next sent to Thébes an intimation that he was anxious to in- 
troduce their hero Melanippus into Sikyén. The Thébans will- 
ingly consented, and he assigned to the new hero a consecrated 
spot in the strongest and most commanding portion of the Sik- 
yonian prytaneium. He did this (says the historian) “ knowing 
that Adrastus would forthwith go away of his own accord ; since 





? Apollodor. iii. 7,4. Herodot.v. 57-61. Pausan. ix. 5, 7; 9, 2. Diodér. 
iv. 65-66. 

Pindar represents Adrastus as concerned in the second expedition against 
Thébes (Pyth. viii. 40-58). 

2? TAcooay 7’ ’Adpyorov pecdiyoynpvv Exor (Tyrteus, Eleg. 9, 7, Schneide- 
win); compare Plato, Phzdr. c. 118. “ Adrasti pallentis imago” meets the 
eye of Aneas in the under-world (Eneid, vi. 480). 

* About Melanippus, see Pindar, Nem. x.36. His sepulchre was shown 
near the Proetid zates of 'Tnebes (Pausan. ix. 18, 1). 


280 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Melanippus was of all persons the most odious to him, as having 
slain both his son-in-law and his brother.” Kleisthenés more- 
over diverted the festivals and sacrifices which had been offered 
to Adrastus, to the newly established hero Melanippus; and the 
lyric tragedies from the worship of Adrastus to that of Diony- 
sus. But his dynasty did not long continue after his decease, 
and the Sikyonians then reéstablished their ancient solemnities.1 

Near the Proetid gate of Thébes were seen the tombs of 
two combatants who had hated each other during life even more 
than Adrastus and Melanippus — the two brothers Eteoklés and 
Polynikés. Even as heroes and objects of worship, they still 
continued to manifest their inextinguishable hostility: those who 
offered sacrifices to them observed that the flame and the smoke 
from the two adjoining altars abhorred all communion, and fleyr 
off in directions exactly opposite. The Théban exegetes assured 
Pausanias of this fact. And though he did not himself witness 
it, yet having seen with his own eyes a miracle not yery dissimi- 
lar at Pionie in Mysia, he had no difficulty in crediting their 
assertion.? 

Amphiaraus when forced into the first attack of Thébes — 
against his own foreknowledge and against the warnings of the 





1 This very curious and illustrative story is contained in Herodot. y. 67. 
’Eret 08 6 Sede TodTo ob wapedidov, dneASov dricw (Kleisthenés, returning 
from Delphi) ég¢pévrile unyavany tH adtd¢ 6 ’Adphotog aGmadhAaée- 
Tat. ‘Qe db of &evppodat ddxee, Téupac &¢ ONBag Tac Botwriac, Eon VéAew 
érayayéoSat MeAdvirroy Tov *Aotakod’ of d? OfBaior Edocav. ’Ennyayero 
6: rov MeAdvirron 6 KAgioSévgc, kat yap tobro det arnynoacdat, dc Exdic- 
tov éovra 'Adpyorw: b¢ tov te adéAgeov Mykioréa dmekrovee, kal TOY yap- 
Bpdv Tvdéa. ‘ 

The Sikyonians (Herodotus says) ré re 67 GAAa ériuwv Tov “Adpnoror, Kal 
mpd¢ Ta Ta3Ea abTod TpaytKoiot xopotot éyépatpov* Tov pév Ardvucoy od Tipé- 
ovrec, Tov dé "Adpyorov. 

Adrastus was worshipped as a hero at Megara as well as at Sikyén: the 
Megarians affirmed that he had died there on his way back from Thébes 
(Pausan. i. 43, 1; Dieuchidas, ap. Schol. ad Pindar. Nem. ix. 31). His 
house at Argos was still shown when Pausanias visited the town (ii. 23, 2). 

? Pausan. ix. 18,3. Tad én’ abroic dpdueva ob Seaoapuevog mioTd buor 
breiAnga eivat. Compare Hygin. f. 68. 

“Et nova fraterno veniet concordia fumo, 
Quem vetus accensd separat ira pyra.” (Ovid, Ibis, 35.° 
The tale was copied by Ovid from Kallimachus (Trist. v. 5, 38) 


‘ 


ERIPHYLE AND ALKMZON. 281 


gods — had enjoined his sons Alkmx6én and Amphilochus not 
only to avenge his death upon the Thébans, but also to punish 
the treachery of their mother, “ Eriphylé, the destroyer of her 
husband.”! In obedience to this command, and having obtained 
the sanction of the Delphian oracle, Alkmzdn slew his mother ;2 
put the awful Erinnys, the avenger of matricide, inflicted on him 
a long and terrible punishment, depriving him of his reason, and. 
chasing him about from place to place without the possibility of 
repose or peace of mind. He craved protection and cure from 
the god at Delphi, who required him to dedicate at the temple, as 
an offering, the precious necklace of Kadmus, that irresistible 
bribe which had originally corrupted Eriphylé.3 He further inti- 
mated to the unhappy sufferer, that though the whole earth was 
tainted with his crime, and had become uninhabitable for him, 
yet there was a spot of ground which was not under the eye of 
the sun at the time when the matricide was committed, and where 





l *Avdpodduavr’ "EpidbAnv (Pindar, Nem. ix. 16). A poem Eryphilé was 
included among the mythical compositions of Stesichorus: he mentioned in 
it that Asklépius had restored Kapaneus to life, and that he was for that 
reason struck dead by thunder from Zeus (Stesichor. Fragm. Kleine, 18, p. 
74). Two tragedies of Sophoklés once existed, Epigont and Alkmeén 
(Welcker, Griechisch. Tragéd. i. p. 269): a few fragments also remain of the 
Latin Epigoni and Alphesibea of Attius: Ennius and Attius both composed 
or translated from the Greek a Latin Alkmeén (Poet. Scenic. Latin. ed. Both. 
pp- 33, 164, 198). 

? Hyginus gives the fable briefly (f. 73; see also Asclepiadés, ap. Schol. 
Odyss. xi. 326). In like manner, in the case of the matricide of Orestés, 
Apollo not only sanctions, but enjoins the deed; but his protection against 
the avenging Erinnyés is very tardy, not taking effect until after Orestés has 
been long persecuted and tormented by them (see Eschyl. Eumen. 76, 197 
462). 

In the Alkmeén of the later tragic writer Thodektés, a distinction was 
drawn: the gods had decreed that Eriphylé should die, but not that Alk- 
meen should kill her (Aristot. Rhetoric. ii. 24). Astydamas altered the 
story. still more in his tragedy, and introduced Alkmeén as killing his 
mother ignorantly and without being aware who she was (Aristot. Poetic. ¢. 
27). The murder of Eriphylé by her son was one of the wapecAjupevor 
uv$a: which could not be departed from; but interpretations and qualifica- 
tions were resorted to, in order to prevent it from shocking the softened 
feelings of the spectators: see the criticism of Aristotle on the <ddmeén of 
Euripidés (Ethic. Nicom. iii. 1, 8). 

3 Ephorus ap. Athens. vi. p. 232. 


282 HISTORY UF GREECE 


therefore Alkmxén yet might find a tranquil shelter. ‘The 
promise was realized at the mouth of the river Achelous, whose 
turbid stream was perpetually depositing new earth and forming 
additional islands. Upon one of these, near Ciniade, Alkmedén 
settled, permanently and in peace: he became the primitive 
hero of Akarnania, to which his son Akarnan gave name! The 
necklace was found among the treasures of Delphi, together with 
that which had been given by Aphrodité to Helen, by the Phé- 
kian plunderers who stripped the temple in the time of Philip 
of Macedén. The Phékian women quarrelled about these valu- 
able ornaments: and we are told that the necklace of Eriphylé 
was allotted to a woman of gloomy and malignant disposition, 
who ended by putting her husband to death; that of Helen to a 
beautiful but volatile wife, who abandoned her husband from a 
reference for a young Epirot.2 

There were several other legends ronpectiai the distracted 
Alkmz6n, either appropriated or invented by the Attic trage- 
dians. He went to Phégeus, king of Psdphis in Arcadia, whose 
daughter Arsinoé he married, giving as a nuptial present the 
necklace of Eriphylé.’ Being however unable to remain there, 
in consequence of the unremitting persecutions of the maternal 
Erinnys, he sought shelter at the residence of king Acheléus, 
whose daughter Kallirhoé he made his wife, and on whose soil he 
obtained repose.3 But Kallirhoé would not be satisfied without 





? Thucyd. ii. 68-102. ® Athene. 1. ¢. 

3 Apollodér. iii. 7,5-6; Pausan. viii. 24,4. These two authors have pre- 
served the story of the Akarnanians and the old form of the legend, repre- 
senting Alkmz6n as having found shelter at the abode of the person or king 
Achel6us, and married his daughter: Thucydidés omits the personality of 
Acheléus, and merely announces the wanderer as having settled on certain 
new islands deposited by the river. 

I may remark that this is a singularly happy adaptation of a legend to an 
existing topographical fact. Generally speaking, before any such adaptation 
can be rendered plausible, the legend is of necessity much transformed ; here 
it is taken exactly as it stands, and still fits on with great precision. 

Ephorus recounted the whole sequence of events as so much political his- 
tory, divesting it altogether of the legendary character. Alkmzd6n and Dio- 
médés, after having taken Thébes with the other Epigoni, jointly undertook 
an expedition into /Etdlia and Akarnania: they first punished the enemies of 
the old CEneus, grandfather of Diomédés, and established the latter as king 
in Kalydon; next they conquered Akarnania for Alkmeén. Alkmzé6n, 


SIEGES OF THEBES. 283 


the possession of the necklace of Eriphylé, and Alkmzén went 
back to Pséphis to fetch it, where Phégeus and his sons slew 
him, He had left twin sons, infants, with Kallirhoé, who prayed 
fervently to Zeus that they might be preternaturally invested 
with immediate manhood, in order to revenge the murder of their 
father. Her prayer was granted, and her sons Amphoterus and 
Akarnan, having instantaneously sprung up to manhood, proceed- 
ed into Arcadia, slew the murderers of their father, and brought 
away the necklace of Eriphylé, which they carried to Delphi.' 
Euripidés deviated still more widely from the ancient epic, by 
making Alkmzdén the husband of Manto, daughter of Teiresias, 
and the father of Amphilochus. According to the Cyclic Thé- 
bais, Manté was consigned by the victorious Epigoni as a special 
offering to the Delphian god; and Amphilochus was son of Am- 
phiaraus, not son of Alkmxén.2 He was the eponymous hero of 
the town called the Amphilochian Argos, in Akarnania, on the 
shore of the Gulf of Ambrakia. Thucydidés tells us that he 
went thither on his return from the Trojan war, being dissatisfied 
with the state of affairs which he found at the Peloponnésian 
Argos.3 The Akarnanians were remarkable for the numerous 
prophets which they supplied to the rest of Greece: their heroes 





though invited by Agamemnon to join in the Trojan war, would not consent 
to do so (Ephor. ap. Strabo. vii. p. 326; x. p. 462). 

1 Apollodor. iii. 7,7; Pausan. viii. 24,5-4. His remarks upon. the mis- 
chieyous longing of Kallirhoé for the necklace are curious: he ushers them 
in by saying, that “many men, and still more women, are given to full into 
absurd desires,” etc. He recounts it with all the bonne foi which belongs to 
the most assured matter of fact. 

A short allusion is in Ovid’s Metamorphoses (ix. 412) 

2 Thébaid, Cy. Reliqu. p. 70, Leutsch; Schol. Apollén. Rhod. i. 408. The 
following lines cited in Athenzeus (vii. p. 317) are supposed by Boeckh, with 
probable reason, to be taken from the Cyclic Thébais; a portion of the 
advice of Amphiariius to his sons at the time of setting out on his laat 
expedition, — 

TlovAdrodéc pot, téxvor, Eywv voor, "Audiroy’ Howe, 
Toiov édapudlov, trav dv kara djpov ixnac. 


There were two tragedies composed by Euripidés, under the title of ’AAk- 
faiwv, 6 da Fodidoc, and *AAKuaiov, 6 dud KopivSov (Dindorf, Fragm 
Eurip. p. 77). 

* Apollodor. iii. 7, 7; Thucyd. ii. 68. 


984 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


were naturally drawn from the great prophetic race of the Me- 
lampodids. 

Thus ends the legend of the two sieges of Thébes; the gree 
est event, except the siege of Troy, in the ancient epic; the great- 
est enterprise of war, between Greeks and Greeks, during the 
time of those who are called the Heroes. 





CHAPTER XV. 
LEGEND OF TROY. 


WE now arrive at the capital and culminating point of the 
Grecian epic, — the two sieges and capture of Troy, with the 
destinies of the dispersed heroes, Trojan as well as Grecian, 
after the second and most celebrated capture and destruction of 
the city. 

It would require a large volume to convey any tolerable idea 
of the vast extent and expansion of this interesting fable, first 
handled by so many poets, epic, lyric and tragic, with their end- 
less additions, transformations and contradictions, — then purged 
and recast by historical inquirers, who under color of setting 
aside the exaggerations of the poets, introduced a new vein of 
prosaic invention,— lastly, moralized and allegorized by philoso- 
phers. In the present brief outline of the general field of Gre- 
cian legend, or of that which the Greeks believed to be their an- 
tiquities, the Trojan war can be regarded as only one among a 
large number of incidents upon which Hekatzus and Herodotus 
looked back as constituting their fore-time. Taken as a special 
legendary event, it is indeed of wider and larger interest than 
any other, but it is a mistake to single it out from the rest as if 
it rested upon a different and more trustworthy basis. I must 
therefore confine myself to an abridged narrative of the current 
and leading facts ; and amidst the numerous contradictory state- 
ments which are to be found respecting every one of them, J 
know no better ground of preference than comparative antiquity, 


LEGEND OF TROY. 285 


though even the oldest tales which we possess — those contained 
in the Iliad — evidently presuppose others of prior date. 

The primitive ancestor of the Trojan line of kings is Dardanus, 
son of Zeus, founder and eponymus of Dardania :! in the account 
of later authors, Dardanus was called the son of Zeus by Elektra, 
daughter of Atlas, and was further said to have come from Samo- 
thrace, or from Arcadia, or from Italy ;2 but of this Home? men- 
tions nothing. ‘The first Dardanian town founded by him was in 
a lofty position on the descent of Mount Ida; for he was not yet 
strong enough to establish himself on the plain. But his son 
Erichthonius, by the favor cf Zeus, became the wealthiest of man- 
kind. His flocks and herds having multiplied, he had in his pas- 
tures three thousand mares, the offspring of some of whom, by 
Boreas, produced horses of preternatural swiftness. Trds, the 
son of Erichthonius, and the eponym of the Trojans, had three 
sons — Ilus, Assaracus, and the beautiful Ganymédés, whom Zeus 
stole away to become his cup-bearer in Olympus, giving to his 
father Trés, as the price of the youth, a team of immortal horses. 

From Tlus and Assaracus the Trojan and Dardanian lines di- 
verge; the former passing from Ilus to Laomed6n, Priam and 
Hector; the latter from Assaracus to Capys, Anchisés and 
Z€neas. Tlus founded in the plain of Troy the holy city of 
Tlium; Assaracus and his descendants remained sovereigns of 
Dardania.4 

It was under the proud Laomedo6n, son of Tus, that Poseidén 
and Apollo underwent, by command of Zeus, a temporary servi- 
tude; the former building the walls of the town, the latter tending 
the flocks and herds. "When their task was completed and the 
penal period had expired, they claimed the stipulated reward ; 
but Laomedén angrily repudiated their demand, and even threat- 
ened to cut off their ears, to tie them hand and foot, and to sell 
them in some distant island as slaves.5 He was punished for this 





1 Wliad, xx. 215. 

2 Hellanik. Fragm. 129, Didot ; Dionys. Hal. i. 50-61; Apollodor. iii. 12, 
1; Schol. Iliad. xviii. 486; Varro, ap. Servium ad Virgil. Aineid. iii. 167° 
Kephalon. Gergithius ap. Steph. Byz. v. ’Apio/3n. 

3 Tliad, v. 265; Hellanik. Fr. 146; Apellod. ii. 5, 9. 

4 Tliad, xx. 236. 

> Tliad, vii. 451; xxi. 456. Hesiod. ap. Schol. Lycophr. 393 


286 AISTORY OF GREECE. 


treachery py a sea-monster, whom Poseidén sent to ravage his 
fields and to destroy his subjects. Laomeddr publicly offered the 
immortal horses given by Zeus to his father Trés, as a reward to any 
one who would destroy the monster. But an oracle declared that a 
virgin of noble blood must be surrendered to him, and the lot fell 
upon Hesioné, daughter of Laomedén himself. Héraklés arriving 
at this critical moment, killed the monster by the aid of a fort 
built for him by Athéné and the Trojans,! so as to rescue both the 
exposed maiden and the people ; but Laomedén, by a second act 
of perfidy, gave him mortal horses in place of the matchless ani- 
mals which had been promised. Thus defrauded of his due; Héra- 
klés equipped six ships, attacked and captured Troy and killed 
Laomedén,? giving Hesioné to his friend and auxiliary Telamén, 
to whom she bore the celebrated archer Teukros.3 A painful 
sense of this expedition was preserved among the inhabitants of 
the historical town of Ilium, who offered no worship to Héra- 
klés.4 

Among all the sons of Laomedén, Priam® was the only one ae 
had remonstrated against the refusal of the well-earned guerdon 
of Héraklés; for which the hero recompensed him by placing 
him on the throne. Many and distinguished were his sons and 
daughters, as well by his wife Hekabé, daughter of Kisseus, as 
by other women.6 Among the sons were Hectér,’ Paris, Déipho- 





? Tliad, xx. 145 ; Dionys. Hal. i. 52. 

* Tliad, vy. 640, Meneklés (ap. Schol. Venet. ad loc.) affirmed that this 
expedition of Héraklés was a fiction; but Diksarchus gaye, besides, other 
exploits of the hero in the same neighborhood, at Thébé Hypoplakié ( Schad. 
Iliad. vi. 396). 

3 Diodér. iv. 82-49. Compare Venet. Schol. ad Iliad. viii. 284. : 

4 Strabo, xiii. p. 596. 

5 As Dardanus, Trés and Ilus are respectively eponyms of Dardania. 
Troy and Ilium, so Priam is eponym of the acropolis Pergamum. Ipiapoe is 
in the Molic dialect Téppayoe (Hesychius): upon which Ahrens remarks, 
“ Ceterum ex hac AXolicd nominis forma apparet, Priamum non minus arcis 
Tlepyauwv eponymum esse, quam Ilum urbis, Troem populi: Tlépyaya enim 
a Ilepiava natum est, ¢ in y mutato.” (Ahrens, De Dialecto AXolica, 8, 7. p, 
56: compare ibid. 28, 8. p. 150, reff” dra2w). 

® Tliad, vi. 245; xxiv. 495. 

7 Hectér was affirmed, both by Steisichorus and Ibykus, to be the son of 
Apollo (Stesichorus, ap. Schol. Ven. ad Iliad. xxiv. 259; Ibyki Fragm. xiv 


PARIS AND HELEN. 28? 


bus, Helenus, Troilus, Polités, Polydérus ; among the daughters 
Laodiké, Kreiisa, Polyxena, and Kassandra. 

The birth of Paris was preceded by formidable presages; tor 
Hekabé dreamt that she was delivered of a firebrand, and Priam, 
on consulting the soothsayers, was informed that the son about 
to be born would prove fatal to him. Accordingly he directed 
the child to be exposed on Mount Ida; but the inauspicious kind- 
ness of the gods preserved him, and he grew up amidst the flocks 
and herds, active and beautiful, fair of hair and symmetrical in 
person, and the special favorite of Aphrodité.! 

It was to this youth, in his solitary shepherd’s walk on Mount 
Ida, that the three goddesses Héré, Athéné, and Aphrodité were 
conducted, in order that he might determine the dispute respect- 
ing their comparative beauty, which had arisen at the nuptials of 
Péleus and Thetis, — a dispute brought about in pursuance of the 
arrangement, and in accomplishment of the deep-laid designs, of 
Zeus. For Zeus, remarking with pain the immoderate numbers of 
the then existing heroic race, pitied the earth for the overwhelming 
burden which she was compelled to bear, and determined to 
lighten it by exciting a destructive and long-continued war.? 





ed. Schneidewin) : both Euphorién (Fr. 125, Meineke) and Alexander /&télus 
follow the same idea. Stesichorus further stated, that after the siege Apolle 
had carried Hekabé away into Lykia to rescue. her from captivity (Pausa- 
nias, x. 27,1): according to Euripidés; Apollo had promised that she should 
die in Troy (Troad. 427). 

By Sapphé, Hector was given as a surname of Zeus, Zed¢ “Exrwp (Hesy- 
chius, v. “Exrope¢) ; a prince belonging to the regal family of Chios, anterior 
to the Ionic settlement, as mentioned by the Chian poet Ién (Pausan. vii. 3, 
3), was so called. 

' Tliad, iii. 45-55 ; Schol. Iliad. iii. 325 ; Hygin. fab. 91; Apollodor. iii. 12, 5, 

* This was the motive assigned to Zats by the old epic poem, the Cyprian 
Verses (Frag. 1. Diintz. p. 12; ap. Schol. ad Iliad. i. 4): _ 

‘H ei loropia mapa Sracivy TH Ta Korpla werorqnort eixévt obtw¢* 

"Hy ére ipia giAa kara ySova RAaOueva...... 
Pa UGS dhelets So's Bapvorépvov rAaro¢ ain. 
Zeve dé ov érénoe, Kai év wvaivaicg mparidecst 
Livdero xovoica: dvprav rauBadropa yaiay, 
‘Piriorg roAéuov weyGAny épw "TAcaxoio, 
*Odpa kevdoeiev Gavatw Bapoc> oi 0 évt Tpotn 
*"Hpwec xteivovto, Atde 0’ éreAcieto Bovan. 
The same motive is touched upon by Eurip. Orest, 1635; Helen, 38; and 


28% HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Paris awarded the palm of beauty to Aphrodité, who promised 
him in recompense the possession of Helena, wife of the Spartan 
Menelaus, — the daughter of Zeus and the fairest of living women. 
At the instance of Aphrodité, ships were built for him, and he 
embarked on the enterprise so fraught with eventual disaster 
to his native city, in spite of the menacing prophecies of his 
brother Helenus, and the always neglected warnings of Kassan- 
dra. 

Paris, on arriving at Sparta, was hospitably entertained by 
Menelaus as well as by Kastor and Pollux, and was enabled to 
present the rich gifts which he had brought to Helen.2 Menelaus 
then departed to Kréte, leaving Helen to entertain his Trojan 
guest—a favorable moment which was employed by Aphrodité 
to bring about the intrigue and the elopement. Paris carried 
away with him both Helen and a large sum of money belonging 
to Menelaus — made a prosperous voyage to Troy — and arrived 
there safely with his prize on the third day.3 

Menelaus, informed by Iris in Kréte of the perfidious return 
made by Paris for his hospitality, hastened home in grief and 





seriously maintained, as it seems, by Chrysippus, ap. Plutarch. Stoic. Rep. p. 
1049: but the poets do not commonly go back farther than the passion of 
Paris for Helen (Theognis, 1232; Simonid. Amorg. Fragm. 6, 118). 

The judgment of Paris was one of the scenes TepeCeOneee on the enchant 
chest of Kypselus at Olympia (Pausan. y. 19, 1). 

1 Argument of the "Ex7 Kirpa (ap. Diintzer, p. 10). These warnings of 
Kassandra form the subject of the obscure and affected poem of Lycophron. 

2 According to the Cyprian Verses, Helena was daughter of Zeus by Ne- 
mesis, who had in vain tried to evade the connection (Athens. viii. 334). 
Hesiod (Schol. Pindar. Nem. x. 150) represented her as daughter of Oceanus 
and Téthys, an oceanic nymph: Sapphd (Fragm. 17, Schneidewin), Pausa- 
nias (i. 33, 7), Apolloddrus (iii. 10, 7), and Isokratés (Encom. Helen. v. ii. p, 
866, Auger) reconcile the pretensions of Léda and Nemesis to a sort of joint 
maternity (see Heinrichsen, De Carminibus Cypriis, p. 45-46). 

3 Herodot. ii. 117. He gives distinctly the assertion of the Cyprian Verses, 
which contradicts the argument of the poem as it appears in Proclus (Fragm. 
1. 1.), according to which latter, Paris is driven out of his course by a storm 
and captures the city of Sidén. Homer (Iliad, vi. 293) seems however to 
countenance the statement in the argument. 

That Paris was guilty of robbery, as well as of the abduction of Helen, is 
several times mentioned in the Iliad (iii. 144; vii. 350-363), also in the argu- 
ment of the Cyprian Verses (sec /schyl. Agam. 534) 


ees es ae 


GRECIAN ARMAMENT AGAINST TROY. 289 


indignation to consult with his brother Agamemnén, as well as 
with the venerable Nestor, on the means of avenging the out- 
rage. ‘They made known the event to the Greek chiefs around 
them, among whom they found universal sympathy: Nestor, Pal- 
amédés and others went round to solicit aid ina contemplated 
attack of Troy, under the command of Agamemnén, to whom 
each chief promised both obedience and unwearied exertion until 
Helen should be recovered.! Ten years were spent in equipping 
the expedition. ‘The goddesses Héré and Athéné, incensed at 
the preference given by Paris to Aphrodité, and animated by 
steady attachment to Argos, Sparta and Mykénz, took an active 
part in the cause; and the horses of Héré were fatigued with 
her repeated visits to the different parts of Greece.? 

By such efforts a force was at length assembled at Aulis? in 
Beedtia, consisting of 1186 ships and more than 100,000 men, — 
a force outnumbering by more than ten to one anything that the 
Trojans themselves could oppose, and superior to the defenders 





1 The ancient epic (Schol. ad II. ii. 286-339) does not recognize the story 
of the numerous suitors of Helen, and the oath by which Tyndareus bound 
them all before he made the selection among them, that each should swear 
not only to acquiesce, but even to aid in maintaining undisturbed possession 
to the husband whom she should choose. This story seems to have been 
first told by Stesichorus (see Fragm. 20. ed. Kleine; Apollod. iii. 10,8). Yet 
it was evidently one of the prominent features of the current legend in the 
time of Thucydidés (i. 9; Euripid. Iphig. Aul. 51-80; Soph. Ajax, 1100). 

The exact spot in which Tyndareus exacted this oath from the suitors, 
near Sparta, was pointed out even in the time of Pausanias (iii. 20, 9). 

2 Tliad, iv. 27-55; xxiv. 765. Argument. Carm. Cypri. The point is em- 
phatically touched upon by Dio Chrysostom (Orat. xi. p. 335-336) in his 
assault upon the old legend. Two years’ preparation —in Dictys Cret. 
i. 16. 

> The Spartan king Agesilaus, when about to start from Greece on his 
expedition into Asia Minor (596 B. c.) went to Aulis personally, in order 
that he too might sacrifice on the spot where Agamemnén had sacrificed 
when he sailed for Troy (Xenoph. Hellen. iii. 4, 4). 

Skylax (¢c. 60) notices the /epdv at Aulis, and nothing else: it seems to 
have been like the adjoining Delium, a temple witha small village grown up 
around it. 

Aulis is recognized as the port from which the expedition started, in the 
Hesiodic Works and Days (y. 650} 

YOL. I. 13 19ue. 


290 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


of Troy even with all her allies included.) It comprised heroea 
with their followers from the extreme points of Greece — from 
the north-western portions of Thessaly under Mount Olympus, 
as well as the western islands of Dulichium and Ithaca, and the 
eastern islands of Kréte and Rhodes. . Agamemnén himself con- 
tributed 100 ships manned with the subjects of his kingdom of 
Mykéne, besides furnishing 60 ships to the Arcadians, who pos- 
sessed none of their own. _Menelaus brought with him 60 ships, 
Nestor from Pylus 90, Idomeneus from Kréte and Diomédés 
from Argos 80 each. Forty ships were manned by the Eleians, 
under four different chiefs; the like number under Megés from 
Dulichium and the Echinades, and under Thoas from Kalyd6n 
and the other télian towns. Odysseus from Ithaca, and Ajax 
from Salamis, brought 12 ships each. The Abantes from Eu- 
bora, under Elephén6r, filled 40 vessels; the Beedtians, under 
Peneleéds and Léitus, 50; the inhabitants of Orchomenus and 
Aspledén, 30; the light-armed Locrians, under Ajax son of Oile- 
us,2 40; the Phokians as many. The Athenians, under Menes- 
theus, a chief distinguished for his skill in marshalling an army, 
mustered 50 ships; the Myrmidons from Phthia and Hellas, under 
Achilles, assembled in 50 ships; Protesilaus from Phylaké and 
Pyrasus, and Eurypylus from Ormenium, each came with 40 
ships; Machadn and Podaleirius, from Trikka, with 30; Admé- 
tus, from Phere and the lake Beebéis, with 11; and Philoktétés 
from Melibea with 7: the Lapithe, under Polypetés, son of 
Peirithous, filled 40 vessels; the Ainianes and Perrhebians, 
under Guneus,? 22; and the Magnétés under Prothous, 40; these — 
last two were from the northernmost parts of Thessaly, near the 
mountains Pélion and Olympus. From Rhodes, under Tlépole- 
mus, son of Héraklés, appeared 9 ships; from Symé, under the 
comely but effeminate Nireus, 3; from Kos, Krapathus and the 





Iliad, ii, 128, Uschold (Geschichte des Trojanischen Kriegs, p.9, Stutgart. 
1836) makes the total 135,000 men. 

? The Hesiodic Catalogue notices Oileus, or Tleus, with a singular etymo 
logy of his name (Fragm. 136, ed. Marktscheffel). 

* Tovvede is the Heros Eponymus of the town of Gonnus in Thessaly ; ; the 
duplication of the consonant and shortening of the vowel oelong to the 
J£olic diatect (Ahrens, De Dialect. Aolic. 50, 4. p. 220). 


ACHILLES. — AJAX.— ODYSSEUS. 291 


neighboring islands, 30, under the orders of Pheidippus and An- 
tiphus, sons of Thessalus and grandsons of Héraklés.1 

Among this band of heroes were included the distinguished 
warriors Ajax and Diomédés, and the sagacious Nestér ; while 
Agamemnon himself, scarcely inferior to either of them in prow- 
ess, brought with him a high reputation for prudence in command. 
But the most marked and conspicuous of all were Achilles and 
Odysseus; the former a beautiful youth born of a divine mother, 
swift in the race, of fierce temper and irresistible might; the lat- 
ter not less efficient as an ally from his eloquence, his untiring 
endurance, his inexhaustible resources under difficulty, and the 
mixture of daring courage with deep-laid cunning which never 
deserted him :? the blood of the arch-deceiver Sisyphus, through 
an illicit connection with his mother Antikleia, was said to flow 
in his veins, and he was especially patronized and protected by 
the goddess Athéné. Odysseus, unwilling at first to take part in 
the expedition, had even simulated insanity ; but Palamédés, sent 
to Ithaca to invite him, tested the reality of his madness by plac- 
ing in the furrow where Odysseus was ploughing, his infant son 
Telemachus. Thus detected, Odysseus could not refuse to join. 
the Achzan host, but the prophet Halithersés predicted to him 
that twenty. years would elapse before he revisited his native 
land.4 To Achilles the gods had promised the full effulgence of 





1 See the Catalogue in the second book of the Iliad. There must pr¢e>- 
ably have been a Catalogue of the Greeks also in the Cyprian Verses; for 
a Catalogue of the allies of Troy is specially noticed in the Argument of 
Proclus (p. 12. Diintzer). 

Euripidés (Iphig. Aul. 165-300) devotes one of the songs of the Chorus 
to a partial Catalogue of the chief heroes. 

According to Dictys Cretensis, all the principal heroes engaged in the 
expedition were kinsmen, all Pelopids (i. 14): they take an oath not to lay 
down their arms until Helen shall have been recovered, and they receive 
from Agamemnon a-large sum of gold. 

? For the character of Odysseus, Diad, iii. 202-220; x. 247. Odyss. xiii. 
295. 

The Philoktétés of Sophoklés carries out very justly the character of the 
Homeric Odysseus (see v. 1035) — more exactly than the Ajax of the same 
poet depicts it: 

3 Sophokl. Philoktét. 417, and Schol.—also Schol. ad Soph. Ajac. 190. 

4 Homer, Odyss. xxiv. 115; Auschyl. Agam. 841; Sophokl. Philoktét. 1011 


292 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


heroic glory before the walls of Troy; nor could the place be 
taken without both his codperation and that of his son after him. 
But they had forewarned him that this brilliant career would be 
rapidly brought to a close; and that if he desired a long life, he 
must remain tranquil and inglorious in his native land. In spite 
of the reluctance of his mother Thetis, he preferred few years 
with bright renown, and joined the Achzan host.! When Nes- 
tor and Odysseus came to Phthia to invite him, both he and his 
intimate friend Patroclus eagerly obeyed the call.2 

Agamemnén and his powerful host set sail from Aulis; but 
being ignorant of the locality and the direction, they landed by 
mistake in Teuthrania, a part of Mysia near the river Kaikus, 
and began to ravage the country under the persuasion that it~ 
was the neighborhood of Troy. ‘Telephus, the king of the coun- 
try,? opposed and repelled them, but was ultimately defeated and 
severely wounded by Achilles. The Greeks now, discovering 
their mistake, retired; but their fleet was dispersed by a storm 
and driven back to Greece. Achilles attacked and took Skyrus, 
and there married Deidamia, the daughter of Lycomédés.4 Te- 
lephus, suffering from his wounds, was directed by the oracle to 
come to Greece and present himself to Achilles to be healed, by 
applying the scrapings of the spear with which the wound had 
been given: thus restored, he became the guide of the Greeks 
when they were prepared to renew their expedition. 





with the Schol. - Argument of the Cypria in Heinrichsen, De Carmin. Cypr. 
p. 23 (the sentence is left out in Dintzer, p. 11). 

A lost tragedy of Sophoklés, ’Odvoceds Macvéuevog, handled this subject. 

Other Greek chiefs were not less reluctant than Odysseus to take part in 
the expedition: see the tale of Poemandrus, forming a part of the temple- 
legend of the Achilleium at Tanagra in Boedtia (Plutarch, Question. Graec. 
p- 299). 

1 Tliad, i. 852; ix. 411. ® Iliad, xi. 782. 

3 Telephus was the son of Augé, daughter of king Aleus of Tegea in 
Arcadia, by Héraklés: respecting her romantic adventures, see the previous 
chapter on Arcadian legends — Strabo’s faith in the story (xii. p. 572). 

The spot called the Harbor cf the Achzans, near Gryneium, was stated 
to be the place where Agamemnon and the chiefs took counsel whether they 
should attack Telephus or not (Skylax, c. 97; compare Strabo, xiv. p. 622). 

4 Tliad, xi. 664; Argum. Cypr. p. 11, Dantzer; Diktys Cret. ii. 3- 4. 

° Euripid. Telephus, Frag. 26, Nindorf; Hygin. f. 101; Diktys,ii.10. Evx- 
ripidés had treated the adventure of Telephus in this lost tragedv: he gave 


el Be i ee Bee 


AGAMEMNON AND IPHIGENEIA. 293 


The armament was again assembled at Aulis, but the goddess 
Artemis, displeased with the boastful language of Agamemnén, 
prolonged the duration of adverse winds, and the offending chief 
was compelled to appease her by the well-known sacrifice of his 
daughter Iphigeneia.!. They then proceeded to Tenedos, from 
whence Odysseus and Menelaus were despatched as envoys to 
Troy, to redemand Helen and the stolen property. In spite of 
the prudent counsels of Antenér, who received the two Grecian 
chiefs with friendly hospitality, the Trojans rejected the demand, 
and the attack was resolved upon. It was foredoomed by the 
gods that the Greek who first landed should perish: Protesi- 
laus was generous enough to put himself upon this forlorn hope, 
and accordingly fell by the hand of Hector. 

Meanwhile the Trojans had assembled a large bedy of allies 
from various parts of Asia Minor and Thrace: Dardanians under 
fneas, Lykians under Sarpedén, Mysians, Karians, Mzonians, 
Alizonians,?. Phrygians, Thracians, and Peonians.3 But vain 





the miraculous cure with the dust of the spear, mpsorotot AopxA¢ BéAyerai 
bivjuact. Diktys softens down the prodigy: “ Achilles cum Machaone et 
Podalirio adhibeutes curam vulneri,” etc. Pliny (xxxiv. 15) gives to the 
rust of brass or iron a place in the list of genuine remedies. 

“Longe omnino a Tiberi ad Caicum: quo in loco etiam Agamemnon 
errasset, nisi ducem Telephum invenisset” (Cicero, Pro L. Flacvo, c. 29). 
The portions of the Trojan legend treated in the lost epics and the trage 
dians, seem to have been just as familiar to Cicero as those noticed in the 
Tliad. 

Strabo pays comparatively little attention to any portion of the Trojan 
war except what appears in Homer. He even goes so far as to give a reason 
why the Amazons did not come to the aid of Priam: they were at enmity 
with him, because Priam had aided the Phrygians agaist them (Iliad, iii 
188: in Strabo, roi¢ ’Iéocv must be a mistake for toi¢ Spvgiv). Strabo can 
hardly have read, and never alludes to, Arktinus; in whose poem the brave 
and beautiful Penthesileia, at the head of her Amazons, forms a marked 
epoch and incident of the war (Strabo, xii. 552). 

1 Nothing occurs in Homer respecting the sacrifice of Iphigeneia (see 
Schol, Ven. ad Il. ix. 145). 

2 No portion of the Homeric Catalogue gave more trouble to Démétrius 
of Sképsis and the other expositors than these Alizonians (Strabo, xii. p 
549; xiii. p. 603): a fictitious place called Alizonium, in the region of Ida, 
was got up to meet the difficulty (ei7’ ’AAaviov, toir’ jdn meTAacLE. 
vov mpoc Ti Tov ’AACover br6Te_orr, etc., Strabo, 1. c.}. 

* See the Catalogue of the Trojans (Iliad, ii. 815-877). 


94 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


was the attempt to oppose the landing of the Greeks: the Tro. 
jans were routed, and even the invulnerable Cyenus,! son of 
Poseidén, one of the great bulwarks of the defence, was slain by 
Achilles. Having driven the Trojans within their walls, Achilles 
attacked and stormed Lyrnéssus, Pédasus, Lesbos and other 
places in the neighborhood, twelve towns on the sea-coast and 
eleven in the interior; he drove off the oxen of A®neas and 
pursued the hero himself, who narrowly escaped with his life : 
he surprised and killed the youthful Tréilus, son of Priam, and 
captured several of the other sons, whom he sold as prisoners 
into the islands of the AAgean2 He acquired as his captive the 
fair Briséis, while Chryséis was awarded to Agamemnon: he 
was moreover eager to see the divine Helen, the prize and sti- 
mulus of this memorable struggle; and Aphrodité and Thetis 
contrived to bring about an interview between them.3 

At this period of the war the Grecian army was deprived of 
Palamédés, one of its ablest chiefs. Odysseus had not forgiven 
the artifice by which Palamédés had detected his simulated in- 
sanity, nor was he without jealousy of a rival clever and cun- 
ning in a degree equal, if not superior, to himself; one who had 
enriched the Greeks with the invention of letters, of dice for 





 Cycnus was said by later writers to be king of Kolénz in the Troad 
(Strabo, xiii. p. 589-603; Aristotel. Rhetoric. ii. 23). Aischylus introduced 
upon the Attic stage both Cycnus and Memnén in terrific equipments (Aris- 
tophan. Ran. 957. Odd’ é&éxAnrrov abrodc Kixvoug Gywr kat Méuvovac ko- 
davogaraporadove). Compare Welcker, Adschyl. Trilogie, p. 433. 

* Jliad, xxiv. 752; Argument of the Cypria, pp. 11, 12, Diintzer. These 
desultory exploits of Achilles furnished much interesting romance to the 
later Greek poets (see Parthénius, Narrat. 21). See the neat summary of 
the principal events of the war in Quintus Smyrn. xiv. 125-1405 Dio Chry- 
sost. Or. xi. p. 888-342, 

Trdilus is only once named in the liad (xxiv. 253); he was mentioned 
also in the Cypria; but his youth, beauty, and untimely end made him an 
object of great interest with the subsequent poets. Sophoklés had a tragedy 
called Tréilus (Welcker, Griechisch. Tragéd. i. p. 124); Tdvdvdporaida deo~ 
xétny arG2eoa, one of the Fragm. Even earlier than Sophoklés, his beau- 
ty was celebrated by the tragedian Phrynichus (Athena. xiii. p. 5643 Virgil, 
Mneid, i. 474; Lycophrén, 807). 

Acgument. Cypr. p. 11, Diintz. Kai perd Taira ’AxiAdede Bhévny émt- 
Svuct Vedoacdat, kal ovvizyayov abrode eig rd abtd *Agpadirn kat Oéric. A 
acene which would have been highly interesting in the hands of Homer. 


MURDER OF PALAMEDES. 295 


anasement, of night-watches, as well as with other useful sug- 
gestions. According to the old Cyprian epic, Palamédés was 
drowned while fishing, by the hands of Odysseus and Diomédés.1 
Neither in the Iliad nor the Odyssey does the name of Palamédés 
occur: the lofty position which Odysseus occupies in both those 
poems — noticed with some degree of displeasure even by Pin- 
dar, who described Palamédés as the wiser man of the two —is 
sufficient to explain the omission.2, But in the more advanced 
period of the Greek mind, when intellectual superiority came to 
acquire a higher place in the public esteem as compared with 
military prowess, the character of Palamédés, combined with his 
unhappy fate, rendered him one of the most interesting persona- 
ges in the Trojan legend. A%schylus, Sophoklés and Euripidés 
each consecrated to him a special tragedy; but the mode of his 
death as described in the old epic was not suitable to Athenian 
ideas, and accordingly he was represented as having been falsely 
accused of treason by Odysseus, who caused gold to be buried in 
his tent, and persuaded Agamemnon and the Grecian chiefs that 
Palamédés had received it from the Trojans.3 He thus forfeited 
his life, a victim to the calumny of Odysseus and to the delusion 





' Argum. Cypr. 1. 1.; Pausan. x. 31. The concluding portion of the 
Cypria seems to have passed under the title of IaAauydeia (see Fragm. 16 
and 1S. p. 15, Dantz.; Welcker, Der Episch. Cycl. p.459; Eustath.ad Hom. 
Odyss. i..107). 

The allusion of Quintus Smyrnzus (v. 197) seems rather to point to the 
story in the Cypria, which Strabo (viii. p. 368) appears not to have read. 

2 Pindar, Nem. vii. 21; Aristidés, Orat. 46. p. 260. 

3 See the Fragments of the three tragedians, aAayqdn¢ — Aristeidés, Or. 
xlvi. p. 260; Philostrat. Heroic. x.; Hygin. fab. 95-105. Discourses for and 
against Palamédés, one by Alkidamas, and one under the name of Gorgias, 
are printed in Reiske’s Orr. Gree. t. viii. pp. 64, 102; Virgil, Atneid, ii. 82, 
with the ample commentary of Servius — Polyzn. Proc. p. 6. 

Welcker (Griechisch. Trag6d. v. i. p. 130, vol. ii. p. 500) has evolved with 
ingenuity the remaining fragments of the lost tragedies. 

According to Diktys; Odysseus and Diomédés prevail upon Palamédés to 
he let down into a deep well, and then cast stones upon him (ii. 15). 

Xenophén (De Venatione, ¢. 1) evidently recognizes the story in the 
Cypria, that Odysseus and Diomédés caused the death of Palamédés; but 
he cannot believe that two such exemplary men were really guilty of se 
iniquitous an act — kaxol dé Expafav 7d Epyov, 

One of the eminences near Napoli still bears the name of Palamidhi. 


296 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


of the leading Greeks. . In the last speech made by the philoso. 
pher Socratés to his Athenian judges, he alludes with sclemanity 
and fellow-feeling to the unjust condemnation of Palamédés, as 
analogous to that which he himself was about to suffer, and his 
companions seem to have dwelt with satisfaction on the compari- 
son.  Palamédés passed for an instance of the slanderous enmity 
and misfortune which so often wait upon superior genius! 

In these expeditions the Grecian army consumed nine years, 
during which the subdued Trojans dared not give battle without 
their walls for fear of Achilles. Ten years was the fixed epical 
duration of the siege of ‘Troy, just as five years was the duration 
of the siege of Kamikus by the Krétan armament which came 
to avenge the death of Minds: ten years of preparation, ten 
years of siege, and ten years of wandering for Odysseus, were 
periods suited to the rough chronological dashes of the ancient 
epic, and suggesting no doubts nor difficulties with the original 
hearers. But it was otherwise when the same events came to be 
contemplated by the historicizing Greeks, who could not be satis- 
fied without either finding or inventing satisfactory bonds of co- 
herence between the separate events. ‘Thucydidés tells us that 
the Greeks were less numerous than the poets have represented, 
and that being moreover very poor, they were unable to procure 
adequate and constant provisions: hence they were compelled to 
disperse their army, and to employ a part of it in cultivating the 
Chersonese,— a part in marauding expeditions over the neigh- 
borhood. Could the whole army have been employed against 
Troy at once (he says), the siege would have been much more 
speedily and easily concluded.3 If the great historian could per- 
mit himself thus to amend the legend in so many points, we 
might have imagined that the simpler course would have been to 
include the duration of the siege among the list of poetical ex- 
aggerations, and to affirm that the real siege had lasted only one 





' Plato, Apolog. Socr. ec. 832; Xenoph. Apol. Socr. 26; Memor. iy. 2, 33; 
Liban. pro Soer. p. 242, ed. Morell.; Lucian, Dial. Mort. 20. 

? Herodot. vii. 170. ‘Ten years is a proper mythical period for a grest war 
te last: the war between the Olympic gods and the Titan gods lasts ten 
years (Hesiod, Theogon. 636). Compare dexdr@ éviavt® (Hom. Odvse 
xvi. 17). 

* Thucyd. i. 11. 


ANGER OF ACHILLES. 297 


year instead of ten. But it seems that the ten years’ duration 
was so capital a feature in the ancient tale, that no critic ventured 
to meddle with it. ; 

A period of comparative intermission however was now at 
hand for the Trojans. The gods brought about the memorable 
fit of anger of Achilles, under the influence of which he refused 
to put on his armor, and kept his Myrmidons incamp. Accord- 
ing to the Cypria, this was the behest of Zeus, who had compas- 
sion on the Trojans: according to the Iliad, Apollo was the origi- 
nating cause,! from anxiety to avenge the injury which his priest 
Chrysés had endured from Agamemnén. For a considerable 
time, the combats of the Greeks against Troy were conducted 
without their best warrior, and severe indeed was the humiliation 
which they underwent in consequence. How the remaining Gre- 
cian chiefs vainly strove to make amends for his absence — how 
Hectér and the Trojans defeated and drove them to their ships 
— how the actual blaze of the destroying flame, applied by Hec- 
tor to the ship of Protesilaus, roused up the anxious and sympa- 
thizing Patroclus, and extorted a reluctant consent from <Achil- 
les, to allow his friend and his followers to go forth and avert the 
last extremity of ruin — how Achilles, when Patroclus had been 
killed by Hector, forgetting his anger in grief for the death of 
his friend, reéntered the fight, drove the Trojans within their 
walls with immense slaughter, and satiated his revenge both 
upon the living and the dead Hectér—all these events have 
been chronicled, together with those divine dispensations on 
which most of them : are made to os in the immortal verse 
of the Iliad. 

Homer breaks off with the burial of Hectér, whose body has 
just been ransomed by the disconsolate Priam; while the lost 
poem of Arktinus, entitled the AXthiopis, so far as we can judge 
from the argument still remaining of it, handled only the subse- 
quent events of the siege. The poem of Quintus Smyrnzus, com- 
posed about the fourth century of the Christian era, seems in its 
first books to coincide with the /£thiopis, in the subsequent 
books partly with the Ilias Minor of Leschés.? 





1 Homer, Iliad, i. 21. 
* Tychsen, Commentat. de Quinto Smyrneo, § iii. ce. 5-7. The “I4ior 
13* 


_ 298 HISTORY OF GREECE 


The Trojans, dismayed by the death of Hector, were again an. 
imated with hope by the appearance of the warlike and beautiful 
queen of the Amazons, Penthesileia, daughter of Arés, hitherte 
invincible in the field, who came to their assistance from Thrace 
at the head of a band of her countrywomen. She again led the 
besieged without the walls to encounter the Greeks in the open 
field; and under her auspices the latter were at first driven back, 
until she too was slain by the invincible arm of Achilles. The 
victor, on taking off the helmet of his fair enemy as she lay on 
the ground, was profoundly affected and captivated by her 
charms, for which he was scornfully taunted by Thersités: ex- 
asperated by this rash insult, he killed Thersités on the spot with 
a blow of his fist. A violent dispute among the Grecian chiefs 
was the result, for Diomédés, the kinsman of Thersités, warmly 
resented the proceeding ; and Achilles was obliged to go to Les- 
bus, where he was purified from the act of homicide by Odys- 
seus.! 

Next arrived Memnén, son of Tithénus and Eés, the most 
stately of living men, with a powerful band of black A®thiopians, 
to the assistance of Troy. Sallying forth against the Greeks, he 
made great havoc among them: the brave and popular Anti- 
lochus perished by his hand, a victim to filial devotion in defence 
of Nestér.2 Achilles at length attacked him, and for a long time 
the combat was doubtful between them: the prowess of Achilles 
and the supplication of Thetis with Zeus finally prevailed; 





Ilépor¢ was treated both by Arktinus and by Leschés: with the latter it 
formed a part of the Ilias Minor. 

* Argument of the A&thiopis, p. 16, Diintzer; Quint. Smyrn. lib. i.; Dik- 
tys Cret. iv. 2-3. 

In the Philoktétés, of Sophoklés, Thersités survives Achilles (Soph. Phil 
358-445). 

* Odyss. xi..522. Keivov 67 xaAdsorov idov, wetd Méuvova diov : see also 
Odyss. iv. 187; Pindar, Pyth. vi.31. &éschylus (ap. Strabo. xy. p. 728) 
conceives Memnén as 4 Persian starting from Susa. 

Ktésias gave in his history full details respecting the expedition of Mem- 
non, sent by the king of Assyria to the relief of his dependent, Priam ot 
Troy; all this was said to be recorded in the royal archives. The Egyp- 
tians affirmed that Memnon had come from Egypt (Diodér. ii. 22; compare 
iv. 77): the two stories are blended together in Pausanias, x. 31,2. The 
Phrygians pointed out the road along which he had marched. 


DEATH OF ACHILLES. 299 


whilst Eds obtained for her vanquished son the consoling gift of 
immortality. His tomb, however,! was shown near the Propontis, 
within a few miles of the mouth of the river sépus, and was 
visited annually by the birds called Memnonides, who swept it 
and bedewed it with water from the stream. So the traveller 
Pausanias was told, even in the second century after the Chris- 
tian era, by the Hellespontine Greeks. 

But the fate of Achilles himself was now at hand. After 
routing the Trojans and chasing them into the town, he was slain 
near the Skean gate by an arrow from the quiver of Paris, di- 
rected under the unerring auspices of Apollo.2 The greatest 
efforts were made by the Trojans to possess themselves of the 
body, which was however rescued and borne off to the Grecian 
camp by the valor of Ajax and Odysseus. Bitter was thé grief of 
Thetis for the loss of her son: she came into the camp with 
the Muses and the Néreids to mourn over him; and when a 
magnificent funeral-pile had been prepared by the Greeks to burn 
him with every mark of honor, she stole away the body and con- 
veyed it to a renewed and immortal life in the island of Leuké in 
the Euxine Sea. According to some accounts he was there blest 
with the nuptials and company of Helen.3 





? Argum. ZEth. ut sup.; Quint. Smyrn. ii. 396-550; Pausan. x. 31, 1. 
Pindar, in praising Achilles, dwells much on his triumphs over Hector, Téle 
phus, Memnén, and Cycnus, but never notices Penthesileia (Olymp. ii. 90 
Nem. iii. 60; vi. 52. Isthm. v. 43). 

Zéschylus, in the ¥vyooracia, introduced Thetis and Eés, each in an atti- 
tude of supplication for her son, and Zeus weighing in his golden scales the 
souls of Achilles and Memnén (Schol. Ven. ad Iliad. viii. 70: Pollux, iv. 
130; Plutarch, De Audiend. Poet. p. 17). In the combat between Achilles 
and ‘Memuta, represented on the chest_of Kypselus at Olympia, Thetis and 
Eos were given each as aiding her son (Pausan. v. 19, 1). 

2 Tliad, xxii. 360; Sophokl. Philokt. 334; Virgil, Aineid, vi. 56. 

3 Argum. Eithiop. ut sup-; Quint. Seige. 151-583 ; Homer, Odyss. v. 310; 
Ovid, Metam. xiii. 284; Eurip. Androm. 1262; Pausan. iii. 19, 13. Accord- 
ing to Diktys (iv. 11), Paris and Deiphobus entrap Achilles by the promise 
of an. interview with Polyxena and kill him. 

A minute and curious description of the island Leuké, or Aww AAbuc vIjCOC, 
is given in Arrian (Periplus, Pont. Euxin. p. 21; ap. Geogr. Min.t. 1). 

The heroic or divine empire of Achilles in ‘Scythia was recognized by 

Alkeens the poct (Alkwi Fragm. Schneidew. Fr. 46), ’AyiAAed, 6 yao Zev 


800 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Thetis celebrated splendid funeral games in honor of her sun, 
and offered the unrivalled panoply, which Héphestos had forged 
and wrought for him, as a prize to the most distinguished warrior 
in the Grecian army. Odysseus and Ajax became rivals for the 
distinction, when Athéné, together with some Trojan prisoners, 
who were asked from which of the two their country had sustained 
greatest injury, decided in favor of the former. The gallant Ajax 
lost his senses with grief and humiliation: in a fit of phrenzy he 
slew some sheep, mistaking them for the men who had wronged 
him, and then fell upon his own sword.! 

Odysseus now learnt from.Helenus son of Priam, whom he had 
captured in an ambuscade,? that Troy could not be taken unless 
both Philoktétés,and Neoptolemus, son of Achilles, could be pre- 
vailed upon to join the besiegers. The former, having been stung 
in the foot by a serpent, and becoming insupportable to the 
Greeks from the stench of his wound, had been left at emnus in 





Sind pédero. Eustathius (ad Dionys. Periégét. 307) gives the story of his 
having followed Iphigeneia thither: compare Antonin. Liberal. 27. 

Ibykus represented Achilles as having espoused Médea in the Elysian 
Field (Idyk. Fragm. 18. Schneidewin). Simondés followed this story (ap- 
Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 815). 

1 Argument of /Ethiopis and Ilias Minor, and Fragm. 2 of the latter,pp. 
17, 18, Dantz.; Quint. Smyrn. v. 120-482; Hom. Odyss. xi. 550; Pindar, 
Nem. vii. 26. The Ajax of Sophoklés, and the contending speeches between 
Ajax and Ulysses in the beginning of the thirteenth book of Ovid’s Meta- 
morphoses, are too well known to need special reference. 

The suicide of Ajax seems to have been described in detail in the Aithi- 
opis : compare Pindar. Isthm. iii. 51, and the Scholia ad loc., which show the 
attention paid by Pindar to the minute circumstances of the old epic. 
See Fragm. 2 of the ’IAéov Tépove of Arktinus, in Dintz. p. 22, which would 
seem more properly to belong to the Aithiopis. Diktys relates the suicide 
of Ajax, as a consequence of his unsuccessful competition with Odysseus, 
not about the arms of Achilles, but about the Palladium, after the taking of 
the city (v. 14). 

There were, however, many different accounts of the manner in which 
Ajax had died, some of which are enumerated in the argument to the drama 
of Sophoklés. Ajax is never wounded in the Iliad: Aischylus made him 
invulnerable except under th2 armyits (see Schol. ad Sophok. Ajac. 833) - 
the Trojans. pelted him with mud — ef tw¢ BapySeig xd rod mhAov (Schol 
Tliad. xiv. 404). 

? Soph. Philokt. 604, 


NEOPTOLEMUS AT TROY 301 


the commencement of the expedition, and had spent ten years! in 
misery on that desolate island; but he still possessed the peerless 
bow and arrows of Héraklés, which were said to be essential to 
the capture of Troy. Diomédés fetched Philoktétés from Lem- 
nus to the Grecian camp, where he was healed by the skill of 
Machaén,? and took an active part against the Trojans —en- 
gaging in single combat with Paris, and killing him with one of 
the Hérakleian arrows. The Trojans were allowed to carry away 
for burial the body of this prince, the fatal cause of all their suf- 
ferings ; but not until it had been mangled by the hand of Mene- 
laus.3. Odysseus went to the island of Skyrus to invite Neoptole- 
mus to the army. The untried but impetuous youth gladly obey- 
ed the call, and received from Odysseus his father’s armor, while 
on the other hand, Eurypylus, son of Télephus, came from Mysia 
as auxiliary to the Trojans and rendered to them valuable service 
— turning the tide of fortune for a time against the Greeks, and 
killing some of their bravest chiefs, amongst whom was numbered 
Peneleés, and the unrivalled leech Machaén.4 The exploits of 





1 Soph. Philokt. 703. "Q peréa puyd, “Og und’ oivoxbtrov méuatog “Hody 
dexeTh ypdvor, etc. 

In the narrative of Diktys (ii. 47), Philoktétés returns from Lemnus to 
Troy much earlier in the war before the death of Achilles, and without any 
assigned cause. 

* According to Sophokl¢s, Héraklés sends Asklépius to Troy to heal Philvk 
tétés (Soph. Philokt. 1415). 

The subject of Philoktétés formed the subject of a tragedy both by Zéschy - 
Ius and by Euripidés (both lost) as well as by Sophoklés. 

3 Argument. Iliad. Minor. Diintz. 1. ¢. Ka? rdv vexpdv 7d Meveddov xarac- 
xiodévta dveripevoe Sartovow oi Tpdec. See Quint. Smyrn, x. 240: he 
differs here in many respects from the arguments of the old poems as given 
by Proclus, both as to the incidents and as to their order in time (Diktys, iv. 
20). The wounded Paris flees to Gindné, whom he had deserted in order te 
follow Helen, and entreats her to cure him by her skill in simples: she ree 
fuses, and permits him to die; she is afterwards stung with remorse, and 
hangs herself (Quint. Smyrn. x. 285-331; Apollodor. iii. 12, 6; Condén. 
Narrat. 23; see Bachet de Meziriac, Comment. sur les Epitres d’Ovide, t. i. 
p. 456). The story of Ginéné is as old as Hellanikus and Kephalon of Ger- 
gis (see Hellan. Fragm. 126, Didot). 

4 To mark the way in which these legendary events pervaded and became 
embodied in the local worship, I may mention the received practice in the 
great temple of Asklépius (father of Machaén) at Pergamus, even in the 


302 HISTORY OF GREECE 


Neoptolemus were numerous, worthy of the glory of his race and 
the renown of his father. He encountered and slew Eurypylus, 
together with numbers of the Mysian warriors: he routed the 
Trojans and drove them within their walls, from whence they 
never again emerged to give battle: nor was he less distinguished 
for his good sense and persuasive diction, than for forward energy 
in the field. 

Troy however was still impregnable so long as the Palladium, 
a statue given by Zeus himself to Dardanus, remained in the 
citadel; and great care had been taken by the Trojans not only 
to conceal this valuable present, but to construct other statues so 
like it as to mislead any intruding robber. Nevertheless the 
enterprising Odysseus, having disguised his person with miserable 
clothing and self-inflicted injuries, found means to penetrate into 
the city and to convey the Palladium by stealth away: Helen 
alone recognized him; but she was now anxious to return to 
Greece, and even assisted Odysseus in concerting means for the 
capture of the town.? 

To accomplish this object, one final stratagem was resorted to. 
By the hands of Epeius of Panopeus, and at the suggestion of 
Athéné, a capacious hollow wooden horse was constructed, capable 
of containing one hundred men: the élite of the Grecian heroes, 
Neoptolemus, Odysseus, Menelaus and others, concealed them- 
selves in the inside of it, and the entire Grecian army sailed away 





time of Pausanias. Télephus, father of Eurypylus, was the local hero and 
mythical king of Teuthrania, in which Pergamus was situated. In the 
hymns there sung, the proem and the invocation were addressed to Télephus ; 
but nothing was said in them about Eurypylus, nor was it permitted even to 
mention his name in the temple, — “ they knew him to be the slayer of Ma- 
chaon:” dpyovra: wiv ard Tyrédov tév tuvav, mpoaddovar d& obdév é¢ Tov 
Eiponvaoy, obdé apyiv év TO va@ Védovaty dvouatery adbrdv, ola desea 
govéa bvTa Maydovoc (Pausan. iii. 26, 7). 

The combination of these qualities in other Homeric chiefs is noted ina 
subs2quent chapter of his work, ch. xx. vol. ii. 

? Argument. Iliad. Minor. p. 17, Diintzer. Homer, Odyss. xi. 510-520. 
Pausan. iii. 26,7. Quint. Smyrn. vii. 553; viii. 201. 

2 Argument. Iliad. Minor. p. 18, Diintz.; Arttinus ap. Dionys. Hal. i. 69; 
Homer, Odyss. iv. 246; Quint. Smyrn. x. 354: Virgil, Aneid, ii. 164, and 
the 9th Excursus of Heyne on that book. 

Compare with this legend about the Palladium, the Roman legend respect 
ing the Ancylia (Ovid, Fasti, III. 381). 


TROJAN HORSE.—LAUOCOON 808 


to Tenedos, burning their tents and pretending to have abandoned 
the siege. The Trojans, overjoyed to find themselves free, 
issued from the city and contemplated with astonishment the 
fabric which their enemies had left behind: they long doubted 
what should be done with it; and the anxious heroes from within 
heard the surrounding consultations, as well as the voice of Helen 
when she pronounced their names and counterfeited the accents 
of their wives.!. Many of the Trojans were anxious to dedicate 
it to the gods in the city as a token of gratitude for their deliver- 
ance; but the more cautious spirits inculeated distrust of an 
enemy’s legacy; and Laocodn, the priest of Poseidén, manifested 
his aversion by striking the side of the horse with his spear. 
The sound revealed that the horse was hollow, but the Trojans 
heeded not this warning of possible fraud; and the unfortunate 
Laocoén, a victim to his own sagacity and patriotism, miserably 
perished before the eyes of his countrymen, together with one of 
his sons, — two serpents being sent expressly by the gods out of 
the sea to destroy him. By this terrific spectacle, together with 
the perfidious counsels of Sinon, a traitor whom the Greeks had 
left behind for the special purpose of giving false information, 
the Trojans were induced to make a breach in their own walls, 
and to drag the fatal fabric with triumph and exultation into their 
city? 





 Odyss. iv. 275; Virgil, Aineid, ii. 14; Heyne, Excurs. 3. ad neid. ii- 
Stesichorus, in his ’IAéov Iléporc, gave the number of heroes in the wooden 
horse as one hundred (Stesichor. Fragm. 26, ed. Kleine; compare Athene- 
xiii. p. 610). 

2 Odyss. viii. 492; xi. 522. Argument of the ’IAiov Tépovc of Arktinus, 
p- 21. Diintz. Hydin. f. 108-135. Bacchylidés and Euphorion ap. Servium 
ad Virgil. Aneid. ii. 201. 

Both Sinon and Laocoén came originally from the old epic poem of Arkti- 
nus, though Virgil may perhaps have immediately borrowed both them, and 
other matters in his second book, from a poem passing under the name of 
Pisander (see Macrob. Satur. v. 2; Heyne, Excurs. 1. ad Zn. ii. ; Welcker, 
Der Episch. Kyklus, v. 97). We cannot give credit either to Arktinus or 
Pisander for the masterly specimen of oratory which is put into the mouth of 
Sinon in the /Eneid. 

In Quintus Smyrnezus (xii. 366), the Trojans torture and mutilate Sinon 
to extort from him the truth: his endurance, sustained by the inspiration of 
Héré, is proof against the extremity of suffering, and he adheres to his false 
tale. This is probably an incident of the old epic, though the delicate taste 


304 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


The destruction of Troy, according to the decree of the gods, 
was now irrevocably sealed. While the Trojans indulged in a 
night of riotous festivity, Sinon kindled the fire-signal to the 
Greeks at Tenedos, loosening the bolts of the wooden horse, from 
out of which the enclosed heroes descended. The city, assailed 
both from within and from without, was thoroughly sacked and de- 
stroyed, with the slaughter or captivity of the larger portion of its 
heroes as well as its people. ‘The venerable Priam perished by 
the hand of Neoptolemus, having in vain sought shelter at the 
domestic altar of Zeus Herkeios; but his son Deiphobus, who 
since the death of Paris had become the husband of Helen, de- 
fended his house desperately against Odysseus and Menelaus, and 
sold his life dearly. After he was slain, his body was fearfully 
mutilated by the latter.’ 

Thus was Troy utterly destroyed — the city, the altars and 
temples,” and the population. A®neas and Antenér were permit- 
ted to escape, with their families, having been always more 
favorably regarded by the Greeks than the remaining Trojans. 
According to one version of the story, they had betrayed the 
of Virgil, and his sympathy with the Trojans, has induced him to omit it. 
Euphorion ascribed the proceedings of Sinon to Odysseus: he also gave a 
different cause for the death of Laocoén (Fr. 35-36. p. 55, ed. Diintz., in tae 
Fragments of Epic Poets after Alexander the Great). Sinon is éraipuc¢ 
’Odvocéwe in Pausan. x. 27, 1. 

1 Odyss. viii. 515; Argument of Arktinas, wt sup.; Euripid. Hecub. 903; 
Virg. Ain. vi. 497 ; Quint. Smyrn. xiii. 35-229; Leschés ap. Pausan. x. 27, 
2; Diktys, y. 12. Ibykus and Simonidés also represented Deiphobus as the 
dvrepaotng ‘EAévne (Schol. Hom. Iliad. xiii. 517). 

The night-battle in the interior of Troy was described with all its fearful 
details both by Leschés and Arktinus: the ’ IAéov Iépocg of the latter seems to 
have been a separate poem, that of the former constituted a portion of the 
Ilias Minor (see Welcker, Der Epische Kyklus, p. 215): the ’IAéov Tlépotg 
by the lyric poets Sakadas and Stesichorus probably added many new inci- 
dents. Polygnétus had painted a succession of the various calamitous scenes, 
drawn from the poem of Leschés, on the walls of the lesché at Delphi, with 
_ the name written over each figure (Pausan. x. 25-26). 

Hellanikus fixed the precise day of the month on which the capture tock 
place (Hellan. Fr. 143-144), the twelfth day of Thargelién. 

2 Aischyi. Agamemn. 527.— 

Bapol & diotot kai Seay idpipara, 
Kai orépua raong tardA2nrat xSovec. 





ee el 


CAPTURE OF TROY. 808 


city to the Greeks: a panther’s skin had been hung over the 
door of Antenor’s house as a signal for the victorious besiegers to 
spare it in the general plunder.! In the distribution of the prin- 
cipal captives, Astyanax, the infant son of Hectdr, was cast from 
the top of the wall and killed, by Odysseus or Neoptolemus: 
Polyxena, the daughter of Priam, was immolated on the tomb of 
Achilles, in compliance with a requisition made by the shade of 
the deceased hero to his countrymen ;2 while her sister Kassandra 
was presented as a prize to Agamemnén. She had sought 
sanctuary at the altar of Athéné, where Ajax, the son of Oileus, 
making a guilty attempt to seize her, had drawn both upon him- 
self and upon the army the serious wrath of the goddess, insomuch 
that the Greeks could hardly be restrained from stoning him to 
death. Andromaché and Helenus were both given to Neopto- 
lemus, who, according to the Ilias Minor, carried away also 
JEneas as his captive.4 

Helen gladly resumed her union with Menelaus: she accom- 
panied him back to Sparta, and lived with him there many years 
in comfort and dignity,5 passing afterwards to a happy immortality 





1 This symbol of treachery also figured in the picture of Polygnétus. 
A different story appears in Schol. Iliad. iii. 206. 

? Euripid. Hecub. 38-114, and Troad. 716; Leschés ap. Pausan. x. 25, 9; 
Virgil, Aneid, iii. 322, and Servius ad loc. 

A romantic tale is found in Diktys respecting the passion of Achilles for 
Polyxena (iii. 2). 

3 Odyss. xi. 422. Arktinus, Argum. p. 21, Diintz. Theognis, 1232 
Pausan. i. 15, 2; x. 26, 3; 31, 1. As an expiation of this sin of their 
national hero, the Lokrians sent to Ilium periodically some of their maidens, 
to do menial service in the temple of Athéné (Plutarch. Ser. Numin. Vindict. 
». 557, with the citation from Euphorion or Kallimachus, ae Epice. 
Vet. p. 118). 

4 Leschés, Fr. 7, Dintz.; ap. Schol. Lycophr. 1263. tise Schol. ad. 
1232, for the respectful recollection of Andromaché, among the traditions of 
ths Molossian kings, as their heroic mother, and Strabo, xiii. p. 594. 

* Such is the story of the old epic (see Odyss. iv. 260, and the fourth book 
generally; Argument of Ilias Minor, p. 20. Duntz.). Polygnétus, in the 
paintings above alluded to, followed the same tale (Pausan. x. 25, 3). 

The anger of the Greeks against Helen, and the statement that Menelaus 
after the capture of Troy approached her with revengeful purposes, but was 
80 mollified by her surpassing beauty as to cast away his uplifted sword, 
pelongs to the age of the tragedians (Aschyl. Agamem. 685-1455: Eurip. 

VOL, I. 200c. 


806 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


in the Elysian fields. She was worshipped as a goddess with her 
brothers the Dioskuri and her husband, having her temple, statue 
and altar at ‘Therapnx and elsewhere, and various examples of 
her miraculous interventions were cited among the Greeks.! The 
lyric poet Stesichorus had ventured to denounce her, conjointly 
with her sister Klytamnéstra, in a tone of rude and plain-spoken 
severity, resembling that of Euripidés and Lycophrén afterwards, 
but strikingly opposite to the delicacy and respect with which she 
is always handled by Homer, who never admits reproaches against 
her except from her own lips.2 He was smitten with blindness, 





Androm. 600-629 ; Helen. 75-120; Troad. 890-1057 ; compare also the fine 
lines in the Eneid, ii. 567-588). 

1 See the description in Herodot. vi. 61, of the prayers offered to her, and 
of the miracle which she wrought, to remove the repulsive ugliness of a little 
Spartan girl of high family. Compare also Pindar, Olymp. iii. 2, and the 
Scholia at the beginning of the ode; Eurip. Helen. 1662, and Orest. 1652- 
1706; Isokrat. Enecom. Helen. ii. p. 368, Auger; Dio Chrysost. Or. xi. p. 
811. Yedc évouiodn napd.roi¢ "EAAnot; Theodectés ap. Aristot. Pol.i. 2, 19 
Ociwv dn’ duooiv Exyovov Pilouaror. 

2 Euripid. Troad. 982 sey.; Lycophrén ap. Steph. Byz. y. Aiyic; Ste- 
sichorus ap. Schol. Eurip. Orest. 239; Fragm. 9 and 10 of the ’ IAéou Iépore, 
Schneidewin : — 

Otvera Tuvddpeac pélwv ardor Seoig pide Acder’ Hrioddpov 
Kixpidoc+ keiva dé Tuvddpew Kovparor yoAwoapéva 
Acyaépovg trpryapovg tidqot 
Kat Airectvopac... < 
ge eae pes ‘Elev Sooke! amnpe, ete. 
He had probably contrasted her with other females carried away by force. 

Stesichorus also affirmed that Iphigeneia was the daughter of Helen, by 
Théseus, born at Argos before her marriage with Menelaus and made over 
to Klytwmnéstra: this tale was perpetuated by the temple of Eileithyia at 
Argos, which the Argeians affirmed to have been erected by Helen (Pausan. 
ii. 22,7). The ages ascribed by Hellanikus and other logographers (Hellan. 
Fr. 74) to Théseus and Helen — he fifty years of age and she a child of seven 
— when he carried her off to Aphidne, can never have been the original form 
of any poetical legend: these ages were probably imagined in order to make 
the mythical chronology run smoothly; for Théseus belongs to the genera- 
tion before the Trojan war. But we ought always to recollect that Helen 
never grows old (rv yap gare Euuev’ dyhpw — Quint. Smyrn. x. 312), and 
that her chronology consists only with an immortal being. Servius observes 
(ad Aneid. ii. 601) —“ Helenam immortalem fuisse indicat tempus. Nam 
constat fratres ejus cum Argonautis fuisse. Argonautarum filiicum Theba- 
nis (Thebano Eteoclis et Polynicis bello) dimicaverunt. Item illorum filii 


HELEN.—STESICHORUS. 307 


and made sensible of his impiety; but having repented and com. 
posed a special poem formally retracting the calumny, was per- 
mitted to recover his sight. In his poem of recantation (the 
famous palinode now unfortunately lost) he pointedly contradicted 
the Homeric narrative, affirming that Helen had never been to 
Troy at all, and that the Trojans had carried thither nothing but 
her image or etdélon.. It is, probably, to the excited religious 
feelings of Stesichorus that we owe the first idea of this glaring 
deviation from the old legend, which could never have been 
recommended by any considerations of poetical interest. 

Other versions were afterwards started, forming a sort of com- 
promise between Homer and Stesichorus, admitting that Helen 
had never really been at Troy, without altogether denying her 
elopement. Such is the story of her having been detained in 
Egypt during the whole term of the siege. Paris, on his de- 
parture from Sparta, had been driven thither by storms, and the 
Egyptian king Proteus, hearing of the grievous wrong which he 





contra Trojam bella gesserunt. Ergo, si immortalis Helena non fuisset, tot 
sine dubio seculis durare non posset.” So Xenophon, after enumerating 
many heroes of different ages, all pupils of Cheirén, says that the life of 
Cheirén suffices for all, he being brother of Zeus (De Venatione, ¢. 1). 

The daughters of Tyndareus are Klytemnéstra, Helen, and Timandra, all 
open to the charge advanced by Stesichorus: see about Timandra, wife of 
the Tegeate Echemus, the new fragment of the Hesiodic Catalogue, recently 
restored by Geel (Gottling, Pref. Hesiod. p. 1xi.). 

It is curious to read, in Bayle’s article Héléne, his critical discussion of the 
adventures ascribed to her — as if they were genuine matter of history, more 
or less correctly reported. 

1 Plato, Republic. ix. p. 587.c.10. domep 7d Tijg ‘EXévng eidwdov Ur7- 
cixopic ono mepysayntov yéverdat év Tpoiy, dyvoia tod dA7bouc. 

Isokrat. Encom. Helen. t. ii. p. 370, Auger; Plato, Pheedr. c. 44. p. 243- 
244; Max. Tyr. Diss. xi. p. 320, Davis; Conén, Narr. 18; Dio Chrysost. 
Or. xi. p. 323. Tdv piv Zrnoixopov tv rH borepov Ody Aéyew, bg Td Rapa 
wav obd? mAciceterv f ‘EAévyn oiddpoce. Horace, Od. i 17, 
Epod. xvii. 42. — 

“ Tnfamis Helenz Castor offensus vice, 
Fraterque magni Castoris, victi prece, 
Adempta vati reddidere lumina.” 
Pausan. iii. 19,5. ‘Virgil, surveying the war from the point of view of the 
Trojans, had no motive to look upon Helen with particular tenderness: 
Deiphobus imputes to her the basest treachcry (Aineid, vi. 511. “ scelus 
exitiale Lac ene ;” compare ii. 567). 


808 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


had committed towards Menelaus, had sem’: him away from the 
country with severe menaces, detaining Helen until her lawful 
husband should come to seek her. When the Greeks reclaimed 
Helen from Troy, the Trojans assured them solemnly, that she 
neither was, nor ever had been, in the town; but the Greeks, 
treating this allegation as fraudulent, prosecuted the siege until 
their ultimate success confirmed the correctness of the statement, 
nor did Menelaus recover Helen until, on his return from Troy, 
he visited Egypt.!. Such was the story told by the Egyptian 
priests to Herodotus, and it appeared satisfactory to his his- 
toricizing mind. “For if Helen had really been at Troy (he 
argues) she would certainly have been given up, even had she 
been mistress of Priam himself instead of Paris: the Trojan 
king, with all his family and all his subjects, would never know- 
ingly have incurred utter and irretrievable destruction for the 
purpose of retaining her: their misfortune was, that while they 
did not possess, and therefore could not restore her, they yet 
found it impossible to convince the Greeks that such was the 
fact.” “Assuming the historical character of the war of Troy, 
the remark of Herodotus admits of no reply; nor can we great- 
ly wonder that he acquiesced in the tale of Helen’s Egyptian 
detention, as a substitute for the “incredible insanity” which the 





1 Herodot. ii. 120. ob yap 6) obtw ye gpevoBAaBne Hy 6 Tpiapuoe, ob0’ of 
dAdor mpoojKovtec abT@, ete. The passage is too long to cite, but is highly 
curious: not the least remarkable part is the religious coloring which he 
gives to the new version of the story which he is adopting, —“the Trojans, 
though they had not got Helen, yet could not persuade the Greeks that this 
was the fact; for it was the divine will that they should be destroyed root 
and branch, in order to make it plain to mankind that upon great crimes the 
gods inflict great punishments.” 

Dio Chrysostom (Or. xi. p. 333) reasons in the same way as Herodotus 
against the credibility of the received narrative. On the other hand, Iso- 
kratés, in extolling Helen, dwells on the calamities of the Trojan war as a test 
of the peerless value of the prize (Encom. Hel. p. 360, Aug.): in the view 
of Pindar (Olymp. xiii. 56), as well as in that of Hesiod (Opp. Di. 165), 
Helen is the one prize ‘contended for. 

Euripidés, in his tragedy of Helen, recognizes the detention of Helen in 
Egypt and the presence of her eidwAov at Troy, but he follows Stesichorus 
in denying her elopement altogether, — Hermés had carried her to Bgypt in 
a clond (Helen, 35-45, 706): compare Von Hoff, De Mytho Helens Euri- 
pides, cap. 2. p. 35 (Leyden, 1843). 


RETURN OF THE GRECIAN HEROES. 309 


genuine legend imputes to Priam and the Trojans. Pansanias, 
upon the same ground and by the same mode of reasoning, pro- 
nounces that the Trojan horse must have been in point of fact a 
battering-engine, because to admit the literal narrative would be 
to impute utter childishness to the defenders of the city. And 
Mr. Payne Knight rejects Helen altogether as the real cause of 
the Trojan war, though she may have been the pretext of it; for 
he thinks that neither the Greeks nor the Trojans could have 
been so mad and silly as to endure calamities of such magni- 
tude “ for one little woman.”! Mr. Knight suggests various po- 
litical causes as substitutes ; these might deserve consideration, 
either if any evidence could be produced to countenance them, 
or if the subject on which they are brought to bear could be 
shown to belong to the domain of history. 

The return of the Grecian chiefs from Troy furnished matter 
to the ancient epic hardly less copious than the siege itself, and 
the more susceptible of indefinite diversity, inasmuch as those 
who had before acted in concert were now dispersed and iso- 
lated. Moreover the stormy voyages and compulsory wanderings 
of the heroes exactly fell in with the common aspirations after 
an heroic founder, and enabled even the most remote Hellenic 
settlers to connect the origin of their town with this prominent 
event of their ante-historical and semi-divine world. And an 
absence of ten years afforded room for the supposition of many 
domestic changes in their native abode, and many family misfor- 
tunes and misdeeds during the interval. One of these heroic 
“ Returns,” that of Odysseus, has been immortalized by the verse 
£ Homer. The hero, after a series of long-protracted suffering 
and expatriation, inflicted on him by the anger of Poseidén, at 
last reaches his native island, but finds his wife beset, his youth- 
ful son insulted, and his substance plundered, by a troop of inse- 
lent suitors ; he is forced to appear as a wretched beggar, and to 
endure in his own person their scornful treatment; but finally, 
by the interference of Athéné coming in aid of his own courage 





Pausan. i. 23, 8; Payne Knight, Prolegg. ad Homer. c. 53. Euphorion 
construed the wooden horse into a Grecian ship called “Imroc, “ The Horse 
(Euphorion, Fragm. 34. ap. Diintzer, Fragm. Epicc. Graec. p. 55). 

See Thucyd. i 12; vi. 2. 


310 HISTORY OF GREEC4. 


and stratagem, he is enabled to overwhelm his enemies, to resuma 
his family position, and to recover his property. The return of 
several other Grecian chiefs was the subject of an epic poem by 
Hagias, which is now lost, but of which a brief abstract or argu- 
ment still remains: there were in antiquity various other Ronin 
of similar title and analogous matter.! 

As usual with the ancient epic, the multiplied sufferings of this 
back-voyage are traced to divine wrath, justly provoked by the 
sins of the Greeks; who, in the fierce exultation of a victory pur- 
chased by so many hardships, had neither respected nor even? 
spared the altars of the gods in Troy ; and Athéné, who had been 
their most zealous ally during the siege, was so incensed by their 
final recklessness, more especially by the outrage of Ajax, son 
of Ojleus, that she actively harassed and embittered their return, 
in spite of every effort to appease her. The chiefs began to 
quarrel among themselves; their formal assembly became a 
scene of drunkenness; even Agamemnon and Menelaus lost 
their fraternal harmony, and each man acted on his own separate 
resolution.3 Nevertheless, according to the Odyssey, Nestor, 
Diomédés, Neoptolemus, Idomeneus and Philoktétés reached 
home speedily and safely: Agamemnon also arrived in Pelopon- 
nésus, to perish by the hand of a treacherous wife; but Mene- 
laus was condemned to long wanderings and to the severest pri- 
vations in Egypt, Cyprus and elsewhere, before he could set foot 
in his native land. . The Lokrian Ajax perished on the Gyrman 
rock. Though exposed to a terrible storm, he had already 
reached this place of safety, when he indulged in the rash boast 
of having escaped in defiance of the gods: no sooner did Po- 
seidén hear this language, than he struck with his trident the 





. _ Suidas, y. Noorog. Willner; De Cyclo Epico, p. 93. Also a poem 
"Atpeddv KaVodog (Athens. vii. p. 281). 

2 Upon this the turn of fortune in Grecian affairs depends (schyl. Age 
memn. 338; Odyss. iii. 180; Eurip. Troad. 69-95). 

3 Odyss. iii, 130-161 ; achyl. Agamemn. 650-662. 

* Odyss, iii. 188-196 ; iy. 5-87. The Egyptian city cf Kanopus, at the 
mouth of the Nile, was believed to have taken its name from the pilot of 
Menelaus, who had died and was buried there (Strabo, xvii. p. 801; Tacit 
Ann. ii. 60).. MevedAdiog vouoc, so called after Menelaus (Dio Ch-yscst. xi 
p- 361). 


UBIQUITY OF THE RETURNING HEROES. 311 


rock which Ajax was grasping and precipitated both into the sea.! 
Kalchas the soothsayer, together with Leonteus and Polypeetés, 
proceeded by land from Troy to Kolophin.? 

In respect however to these and other Grecian heroes, tales 
were told different from those in the Odyssey, assigning to them 
a long expatriation and a distant home. Nestér went to Italy, 
where he founded Metapontum, Pisa and Hérakleia:3 Philok- 
tétést also went to Italy, founded Petilia and Krimisa, and sent 
settlers to Egesta in Sicily. . Neoptolemus, under the advice of 
Thetis, marched by land. across Thrace, met with Odysseus, who 
had come by sea, at Maroneia, and then pursued his journey to 
Epirus, where he became king of the Molossians.5. Idomeneus 
came to Italy, and founded Uria in the Salentine peninsula. . Di- 
omédés, after wandering far and wide, went, along: the Italian 
coast into the innermost Adriatic gulf, and finally settled in Dau- 
nia, founding the cities of Argyrippa, Beneventum, Atria and 
Diomédeia: by the favor of Athéné he became immortal, and 
was worshipped as a. god in many different places.6 The Lo- 





1 Odyss. iv. 500.. The epic Néoroc of Hagias placed this adventure of 
Ajax on the rocks of Kaphareus, a southern promontory of Eubea (Argum, 
Nooror, p. 23, Diintzer). Deceptive lights were kindled on the dangerous 
rocks by Nauplius, the father of Palamédés, in revenge for the death of his 
son (Sophoklés, NabrAzo¢ Ilupkaede, a lost tragedy; Hygin. f. 116; Senec. 
Agamemn. 567). 

2 Argument. Noorou, ut sup. There were monuments of Kalchas near 
Sipontum in Italy also (Strabo, vi. p. 284), as well as at Selgé in Pisidia 
(Strabo, xii. p. 570). : 

3 Strabo, vy. p. 222; vi. p. 264. Vellei. Paterc. i.1; Servius ad Ain, x. 179, 
He had built a temple to Athéné in the island ef Keds (Strabo, x. p, 487). 

4 Strabo, vi. pp. 254, 272; Virgil, dn. iii. 401, and Servius ad loc.; Ly- 
cophrén, 912. 

Both the tomb of Philoktétés.and the arrows of Héraklés which he had 
ased against Troy, were for a long time shown at Thurium (Justin, xx. 1). 

® Argumeut. Néorot, p. 25, Diintz.;. Pindar, Nem. iv. 51, According to 
Pindar, however, Neoptolemus comes from Troy by sea, misses the island of 
Skyrus, and sails round to the Epeirotie Ephyra (Nem. vii. 37). 

6 Pindar, Nem. x. 7, with the Scholia. Strabo, iii. p. 150; v. p. 214-215; 
vi, p. 284, Stephan. Byz. Apyiperra, Avoundeia. Aristotle recognizes him 
as buried in the Diomedean islands in the Adriatic (Anthol. Gr. Brunck. i. 


p. 178). pea : 
The identical tripod which had been gained by Diomédés, as victor in 


812 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


krian followers of Ajax founded the Epizephyrian Lokri on the 
southernmost corner of Italy,! besides another settlement in Libya. 
I have spoken in another place of the compulsory exile of 'Teu- 
kros, who, besides founding the city of Salamis in Cyprus, is said 
to have established some settlements in the Iberian peninsula.? 
Menestheus the Athenian did the like, and also founded both Elza 
in Mysia and Skylletium in Italy. The Arcadian chief Aga- 
penér founded Paphus in Cyprus. Epeius, of Panopeus in 
Phokis, the constructor of the Trojan horse with the aid of the 
goddess Athéné, settled at Lagaria near Sybaris on the coast of 
Italy ; and the very tools which he had employed in that remark- 
able fabric were shown down toa late date in the temple of 
Athéné at Metapontum.5 ‘Temples, altars and towns were also 
pointed out in Asia Minor, in Samos and in Kréte, the foundation 
of Agamemnon or of his followers.6 The inhabitants of the Gre- 
cian town of Skioné, in the Thracian peninsula called Palléné or 
Pelléné, accounted themselves the offspring of the Pellénians 
from Achza in Peloponnésus, who had served under Agamem- 
non before Troy, and who on their return from the siege had 
been driven on the spot by a storm and there settled.7 The 
Pamphylians, on the southern coast of Asia Minor, deduced their 





the chariot-race at the funeral games of Patroclus, was shown at Delphi in 
the time of Phanias, attested by an inscription, as well as the dagger which 
had been worn by Helikaén, son of Antenér (Athene. vi. p. 232). 

1 Virgil, Aineid, iii. 399.; xi. 265; and Servius, ibid. Ajax, the son of 
Oileus, was worshipped there as a hero (Condén, Narr. 18). 

2 Strabo, ili. p. 257; Isokratés, Evagor. Encom. p. 192; Justin, xliv. 3. 
Ajax, the son of Teukros, established a temple of Zeus, and an hereditary 
priesthood always held by his descendants (who mostly bore the name of 
Ajax or Teukros), at Olbé in Kilikia (Strabo, xiv. p. 672). Teukros carried 
with him his Trojan captives to Cyprus (Athenee. vi. p. 256). 

3 Strabo, iii. p. 140-150; vi. p. 261; xiii. p. 622. See the epitaphs on 
Teukros and Agapendr by Aristotle (Antholog. Gr. ed. Brunck. i. p. 179-180). 

4 Strabo, xiv. p. 683 ; Pausan. viii. 5, 2. 

5 Strabo, vi. p. 263; Justin, xx. 2; Aristot. Mirab. Ausc. c. 108. Also the 
epigram of the Rhodian Simmias called [leAexi¢ (Antholog. Gr. Brunck. i- 
p- 210). ay 

® Vellei. Patercul. i. 1. Stephan. Byz. v. Adu. Strabo, xiii. p. 605 5 xiv 
p. 639. Theopompns (Fragm. 111, Didot) recounted that Agamemnon and 
nis followers had possessed themselves of the larger portion of Cyprus 

7 Thucydid. iv. 120. 


MEMORIALS OF THE DISPERSED HEROES. 313 


origin from the wanderings of Amphilochus and Kalchas after 
the siege of Troy: the inhabitants of the Amphilochian Argos 
on the Gulf of Ambrakia revered the same Amphilochus as their 
founder... The Orchomenians under Jalmenus, on quitting the 
conquered city, wandered or were driven to the eastern extremity 
of the Euxine Sea; and the barbarous Achzans under Mount 
Caucasus were supposed to have derived their first establishment 
from this source.2 Merionés with his Krétan followers settled 
at Engyion in Sicily, along with the preceding Krétans who had 
remained there after the invasion of Minds. The Elyminians in 
Sicily also were composed of Trojans and Greeks separately 
driven to the spot, who, forgetting their previous differences, 
united in the joint settlements of Eryx and Egesta.3 We hear 
of Podaleirius both in Italy and on the coast of Karia;4 of Aka- 
mas, son of Théseus, at Amphipolis in Thrace, at Soli in Cyprus, 
and at Synnada in Phrygia ;> of Guneus, Prothous and Eurypy- 
lus, in Kréte as well as-in Libya.6 The obscure poem of Ly- 
cophrén enumerates many of these dispersed and expatriated 
heroes, whose conquest of Troy was indeed a Kadmeian victory 
(according to the proverbial phrase of the Greeks), wherein the 
sufferings of the victor were little inferior to those of the van- 
quished.?' It was particularly among the Italian Greeks, where 
they were worshipped with very special solemnity, that their 
presence as wanderers from Troy was reported and believed.8 





1 Herodot. vii. 91; Thucyd. ii. 68. According to the old: elegiac poet 
Kallinos, Kalchas himself had died at Klarus near Kolophon after his march 
from Troy, but Mopsus, his rival in the prophetic function, had conducted his 
followers into Pamphylia and Kilikia (Strabo, xii. p. 570; xiv.p. 668). The 
oracle of Amphilochus at Mallus in Kilikia bore the highest character for 
exactness and truth-telling in the time of Pausatitas, wavteiov awevdéotarov 
tov én’ £uod (Paus, i. 34, 2). Another story recognized Leonteus and Poly- 
pextés as the founders of Aspendus in Kilikia (Eustath. ad Iliad. ii. 138). 

? Strabo, ix. p. 416. 3 Diod6r. iv. 79; Thucyd. vi. 2. 

4 Stephan, Byz. v. Zdpva; Lycophron, 1047. 

5 Aischines, De Falsi Legat. c. 14; Strabo, xiv. p. 683; Stephan. Byz. 
vy. Lovvada. 

6 Lycophrén, 877-902, with Scholia; Apollodér. Fragm. p. 386, Heyne. 
There is also a long enumeration of these returning wanderers and founders 
of new settlements in Solinus (Polyhist. c. 2). 

7 Strabo, iii. p. 150. 

¥ Aristot. Mirabil. Auscult. 79, 106, 107, 109, 111. 

VOL. I. 14 


314 HISTORY OF GREECE, 


I pass over the numerous other tales which circulated among 
the ancients, illustrating the ubiquity of the Grecian and Trojan 
heroes as well as that of the Argonauts, — one of the most strik. 
ing features in the Hellenic legendary world. Amongst them 
all, the most interesting, individually, is Odysseus, whose roman- 
tic adventures in fabulous places and among fabulous persons 
have been made familiarly known by Homer. The goddesses 
Kalypso and Circé; the semi-divine mariners of Pheacia, whose 
ships are endowed with consciousness and obey without a steers- 
man; the one-eyed Cyclopes, the gigantic Lastrygones, and the 
wind-ruler A¢olus ; the Sirens who ensnare by their song, as the 
Lotophagi fascinate by their food—all these pictures formed in- 
tegral and interesting portions of the old epic. Homer leaves 
Odysseus’ reéstablished in his house and family ;' but so marked 
a personage could never be permitted to remain in the tameness 
of domestic life: the epic poem called the Telegonia ascribed to 
him a subsequent series of adventures. After the suitors’ had 
been buried by their relatives, he offered sacrifice to the Nymphs, 
and then went to Elis to inspect his herds of cattle there pastur- 
ing: the Eleian Polyxenus welcomed him hospitably, and made 
him a present of a bowl: Odysseus then returned to Ithaka, and 
fulfilled the rites and sacrifices prescribed to him by Teiresias in 
his visit to the under-world. This obligation discharged, he went 
to the country of the Thesprotians, and there married the queen 
Kallidiké: he headed the Thesprotians in a war against the 
Brygians, the latter being conducted by Arés himself, who fierce- 
ly assailed Odysseus; but the goddess Athéné stood by him, and 
he was enabled to make head against Arés until Apollo came 





* Strabo, i. p. 48. After dwelling emphatically on the long voyages of 
Dionysus, Héraklés, Jasén, Odysseus, and Menelaus, he says, Alveiay 02 Kat 
’Avtqvopa Kal ‘Evetodc, kal drAdc Tove éx Tod Tpwikod roAéuov rAavynSéevTac 
ele macav THY oikovpévyy, Gov uy Tov Tahadv dv8pdrev vopicat; 
LvvéBn yap OR Toi¢g TéTe “EAAnOLY, duoiwe kal Toig BaBaporc, da rdv Tig oTpa- 
Tetag xpovov, droBaretv Ta Te tv olky kal TH OTrpateig mopiodévra’ Gore ueTa 
Thy Tod "IAiov Katactpodiy tobe te vixhoavtrag éxt Agorecay tparéodat did 
Tag dropiac, Kal TOAAG padAdAov tod HrTnVEvtag Kal mEptyevouévove ek TO 
roAéuov. Kai 67 nat rode ind TrobTaY KTLOSH VAL AéyovTal KATG 
maocav thy tfa THO 'EAAGS OC Tapadiay, gor. 0 Sov Kal Ty ved 
yarav, 


ZNEAS AND HIS WANDERINGS. 315 


and parted them. Odysseus then returned to Ithaka, leaving 
the Thesprotian kingdom to Polypeetés, his son by Kallidiké. 
Telegonus, his son by Circé, coming to Ithaka in search of his 
father, ravaged the island and killed Odysseus without knowing 
who he was. Bitter repentance overtook the son for his un- 
designed parricide: at his prayer and by the intervention of 
his mother Circé, both Penelopé and Télemachus were made im- 
mortal: Telegonus married Penelopé, and Télemachus married 
Circé.! 

We see by this poem that Odysseus was represented as the 
mythical ancestor of the Thesprotian kings, just as Neoptolemus 
was of the Molossian. 

It has already been mentioned that Antenér and Aneas stand 
distinguished from the other Trojans by a dissatisfaction with 
Priam and a sympathy with the Greeks, which is by. Sophoklés 
and others construed as treacherous collusion,? — a suspicion in- 
directly glanced, though emphatically repelled, by the Aineas of 
Virgil. In the old epic of Arktinus, next in age to the Iliad 
and Odyssey, Aineas abandons Troy and retires to Mount Ida, 
in terror at the miraculous death of Laocoén, before the entry of 
the Greeks into the town and the last night-battle: yet Leschés, 
in another of the ancient epic poems, represented him as having 
been ‘carried away captive by Neoptolemus.4 In a remarkable 





1 The Telegonia, composed by Eugammon of Kyréné, is lost, but the 
Argument of it has been preserved by Proclus (p. 25, Diintzer; Dictys, vi. 
15). 

Pausanias quotes a statement from the poem called Thesprétis, respecting 
a son of Odysseus and Penelopé, called Ptoliporthus, born after his return 
from Troy (viii. 12, 3). Nitzsch (Hist. Homer. p. 97) as well as Lobeck 
seem to imagine that this is the same poem as the Telegonia, under another 
title. 

Aristotle notices an oracle of Odysseus among the Eurytanes, a brancli 
of the AXtolian nation: there were also places in Epirus which boasted of 
Odysseus as their founder (Schol. ad Lycophréon. 800; Stephan. Byz. v. 
Botverua; Etymolog. Mag. ’Apxeiovoc; Plutarch, Quest. Gr. c. 14). 

? Dionys. Hal. i. 46-48; Sophokl. ap. Strab. xiii. p. 608; Livy,i.1; Xeno 
pho, Venat. i. 15. 

3 Min. ii. 433. 

4 Argument of ’IAiov Iléporg ; Fragm. 7. of Leschés, in Duntzer’s Collee 
tion, p. 19-21. 

Hellanikus seems to have adopted this retirement of Aineas to the strong 


316 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


passage of the Iliad, Poseidon describes the family of Priam as 
haying incurred the hatred of Zeus, and predicts that A®neas 
and his descendants shall reign over the Trojans: the race of 
Dardanus, beloved by Zeus more than all his other sons, would 
thus be preserved, since Aineas belonged to it. Accordingly, 
when Amneas is in imminent peril from the hands of Achilles, 
Poseidén specially interferes to rescue him, and even the impla- 
cable miso-Trojan goddess Héré assents to the proceeding.! These 
passages have been construed by various able critics to refer to a 
family of philo-Hellenic or semi-Hellenic ASneadx, known even 
in the time of the early singers of the Iliad as masters of some 
territory in or near the Troad, and professing to be descended 
from, as well as worshipping, A2neas. In the town of Sképsis, 
situated in the mountainous range of Ida, about thirty miles east- 
ward of Ilium, there existed two noble and priestly families who 
professed to be descended, the one from Hectér, the other from 
ZEneas. The Sképsian critic Démétrius (in whose time both these 
families were still to be found) informs us that Skamandrius son 
of Hector, and Ascanius son of AZneas, were the archegets or 
heroic founders of his native city, which had been originally 
situated on one of the highest ranges of Ida, and was subse- 





est parts of Mount Ida, but to have reconciled it with the stories of the 
migration of Aineas, by saying that he only remained in Ida a little time, 
and then quitted the country altogether by virtue of a convention concluded 
with the Greeks (Dionys. Hal. i. 47-48). Among the infinite variety of 
stories respecting this hero, one was, that after having effected his settle- 
ment in Italy, he had returned to Troy and resumed the sceptre, bequeath- 
ing it at his death to Ascanius (Dionys. Hal. i. 53): this was a comprehcn- 
sive scheme for apparently reconciling all the legends. 
! Tliad, xx. 300. Poseid6n speaks, respecting Aineas — 

"AAW dyed’, jueic wép pv br’ éx« Vavarov dyayopev, 

Maros Kat Kpovidne xexyoAdcerat, aixev ’AytAAeds 

Tévde kataxretyy* nudptpov dé of éor’ dréaodat, 

"Odpa up Goreppog yeveh Kai ddavrog bAnrat 

Aapdavov, bv Kpovidne rept ravrav gidato raidwr, 

Oi &Sev éeyévovto, yuvatkdv te Svyraor. 

"Hdn yap Iprapov yevenv nxdype Kpovior 

Nov 02 67 Alveiao Bin Tpdecoty avage, 

Kai raidwv raidec, tol xev peroriode yévwvrat. 
Again, v. 339, Poseidén tells Auneas that he has nothing to dread from any 
other Greek than Achilles. 


WORSHIP OF HECTOR AND ZNEAS IN THE TROAD. 817 


quently transferred by them to the less lofty spot on which it 
stood in his time.t In Arisbé and Gentinus there seem to have 
been families professing the same descent, since the same arche- 
gets were acknowledged.2. In Ophrynium, Hectér had his con. 
secrated edifice, and in Ilium both he and Aineas were worshipped 
as gods:3 and it was the remarkable statement of the Lesbian 
Menekratés, that Aineas, “ having been wronged by Paris and 
stripped of the sacred privileges which belonged to him, avenged 
himself by betraying the city, and then became one of the Greeks.”4 

One tale thus among many respecting Aineas, and that too the 
most ancient of all, preserved among the natives of the Troad, 
who worshipped him as their heroic ancestor, was, that after the 
capture of Troy he continued in the country as king of the re- 
maining Trojans, on friendly terms with the Greeks. But there 
were other tales respecting him, alike numerous and irreconcil- 





1 See O. Miiller, on the causes of the mythe of A&neas and his voyage to 
Italy, in Classical Journal, vol. xxvi. p. 308; Klausen, Aineas und die Pen. 
ten, vol. i. p. 43-52. 

Démétrius Sképs. ab. Strab. xiii. p. 607; Nicolaus ap. Steph. Byz. v. 
*Acxavia. Démétrius conjectured that Sképsis had been the regal seat of 
Afneas: there was a village calied Aneia near to it (Strabo, xiii. p. 603). 

2 Steph. Byz. v. "Apic8y, Tevtivoc. Ascanius is king of Ida after the 
departure of the Greeks (Conén, Narr. 41; Mela, i. 18). Ascanius portus 
between Phokx and Kymé. 

® Strabo, xiii: p. 595; Lycophrén, 1208, and Sch.; Athenagoras, Legat. 
1. Inscription in Clarke’s Travels, vol. ii. p. 86, Ol ’"Iveig Tov warpiov Fedv 
Aiveiav. Lucian, Deor. Concil. ¢. 12. i. 111. p. 534, Hemst. 

4 Menckrat. ap. Dionys. Hal. i. 48.  ’Ayavode dé avin eixe (after the burial) 
kal éddkeov Tie oTpaTiac Thy Kedadjy.annpaxdat. “Opus dé Tagov aire dai- 
aavrec, éxorgueov yh. waon, Gxpic “IAsog éGAw, Aiveiew évddvrog,  Alveing 
yap dritoc édv id ’AAesavdpov, kal dnd yepéwy lepav éerpyouevoc, dvérpewe 
Ipiapov, épyacapuevoc dé tavra, ic "Axarey éyeyovel. 

Abas, in his Jroica, gave a narrative different from any other preserved : 
® Quidam ab Abante, qui Zroica scripsit, relatuam ferunt, post discessum a 
Trojd Greecoram Astyanacti ibi datum regnum, hune ab Antenore expul- 
sum sociatis sibi finitimis civitatibus, inter quas et Arisba fuit:. Aunean. hoc 
gre tulisse, et pro Astyanacte arma cepisse ac prospere gesta re Astyanact. 
restituisse regnum” (Servius ad Virg. Aineid. ix. 264). According to Dik- 
tys, Antenér remains king and Aineas goes away (Dikt. v. 17): Antenor 
brings the Palladium to the Greeks (Dikt. vy. 8). Syncellus, on the con- 
trary, tells us that the sons of Hectér recovered Ilium by the suggestions of 
Helenus, expelling the Atenorids (Syncell. p. 322, ed. Bonn). 


818 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


able: the hand of destiny marked him as a wanderer ( fato pro- 
fugus), and his ubiquity is not exceeded even by that of Odys- 
seus. We hear of him at nus in Thrace, in Palléné, at Aineia 
in the Thermaic Gulf, in Delus, at Orchomenus and Mantineia 
in Arcadia, in the islands of Kythéra and Zakynthus, in Leukas 
and Ambrakia, at Buthrotum in Epirus, on the Salentine penin- 
sula and various other places in the southern region of Italy; at 
Drepana and Segesta in Sicily, at Carthage, at Cape Palinurus, 
Cumz, Misenum, Caieta, and finally in Latium, where he lays 
the first humble foundation of the mighty Rome and her em- 
pire! And the reason why his wanderings were not continued 
still further was, that the oracles and the pronounced will of the 
gods directed him to settle in Latium.2 In each of these numer- 
ous places his visit was commemorated and certified by local 
monuments or special legends, particularly by temples and per- 
manent ceremonies in honor of his mother Aphrodité, whose 
worship accompanied him everywhere: there were also many 
temples and many different tombs of /®neas himself3 The vast 
ascendency acquired by Rome, the ardor with which all the 
literary Romans espoused the idea of a Trojan origin, and the 
fact that the Julian family recognized A®neas as their gentile 
primary ancestor, — all contributed to give to the Roman version 
of his legend the preponderance over every other. ‘The various 
other places in which monuments of Aineas were found came 
thus to be represented as places where he had halted for a time 





1 Dionys. Halic. A. R. i. 48-54; Heyne, Excurs. 1 ad Aineid. iii.; De 
Z€new Erroribus, and Excurs. 1 ad Ain. v.; Conén. Narr. 46; Livy, xl. 4; 
Stephan. Byz. Aiveca. The inhabitants of AEneia in the Thermaie Gulf 
worshipped him with great solemnity as their heroic founder (Pausan. iii. 
22,4; viii. 12,4). The tomb of Anchisés was shown on the confines of the 
Arcadian Orchomenus and Mantineia (compare Steph. Byz. v. Kadvac), 
under the mountain called Anchisia, near ‘a temple of Aphrodité: on the 
discrepancies respecting the death of Anchisés (Heyne. Excurs, 17 ad Ain. 
iii.): Segesta in Sicily founded by Aineas (Cicero, Verr. iv. 33). 

* Tod 62 unkére mpoowrépa Tio Ebporne mAcioar Tov Tpaikdy oréAor, of Te 
XY nopuot éyévovro airiot, etc. (Dionys. Hal. i. 55). 

- 3 Dionys. Hal. i. 54. Among other places, his tomb was shown at Bese. 
cynthia, in Phrygia (Festus, v. Romam, p. 224, ed. Miller): a curious article, 
which contains an assemblage of the most contradictory statements respect. 
ing both Aineas and Latinus, 


ENEAS FROM TROY TO ROME. 819 


en his way from Troy to Latium. But though the legendary 
pretensions of these places were thus eclipsed in the eyes of 
those who constituted the literary public, the local belief was not 
extinguished: they claimed the hero as their permanent proper- 
ty, and his tomb was to them a proof that he had lived and died 
among them. 

Antenér, who shares with Aineas the favorable sympathy of 
the Greeks, is said by Pindar to have gone from Troy along with 
Menelaus and Helen into the region of Kyréné in Libya.! But 
according to the more current narrative, he placed himself at 
the head of a body of Eneti or Veneti from Paphlagonia, who 
had come as allies of Troy, and went by sea into the inner part 
of the Adriatic Gulf, where he conquered the neighboring bar- 
barians and founded the townof Patavium (the modern Padua); 
the Veneti in this region were said to owe their origin to his im- 
migration.2 We learn further from Strabo, that Opsikellas, one 
of the companions of Antendér, had continued his wanderings 
even into Ibéria, and that he had there established a settlement 
bearing his name.3 

Thus endeth the Trojan war; together with its sequel, the dis- 
persion of the heroes, victors as well as vanquished. The ac- 
count here given of it has been unavoidably brief and imperfect ; 
for in a work intended to follow consecutively the real history of 
the Greeks, no greater space can be allotted even to the most 
splendid gem of their legendary period. Indeed, although it would 
be easy to fill a large volume with the separate incidents which 
have been introduced into the “Trojan cycle,” the misfortune is 
that they are for the most part so contradictory as to exclude all 
possibility of weaving them into one connected narrative. We 
are compelled to select one out of the number, generally without 
any solid ground of preference, and then to note the variations of 
the rest. No one who has not studied the original documents 





! Pindar, Pyth. v., and the citation from the Néoroz of Lysimachus in the 
Scholia; given still more fully in the Scholia ad Lyccphron. 875. There 
was a Addo¢ "Avrnvopidav at Kyréné. 

2 Livy, i. 1. Servius ad AMneid. i. 242. Strabo, i. 48; y 212. Ovid 
Pasti, iv. 75. 

3 Strabo, iii. p. 157. 


820 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


can imagine the extent to which this discrepancy proceeds ; it 
covers almost every portion and fragment of the tale.! 

But though much may have been thus omitted of what the 
reader might expect to find in an account of the Trojan war, its 
genuine character has been studiously preserved, without either 
exaggeration or abatement. The real Trojan war is that which 
was recounted by Homer and the old epic poets, and continued 
by all the lyric and tragic composers. For the latter, though 
they took great liberties with the particular incidents, and in- 
troduced to some extent a new moral tone, yet worked more or 
less faithfully on the Homeric scale: and even Euripides, who 
departed the most widely from the feeling of the old legend, nev 
er lowered down his matter tothe analogy of contemporary life. 
They preserved its well-defined object, at once righteous and ro- 
mantic, the recovery of the daughter of Zeus and sister of the 
Dioskuri —its mixed agencies, divine, heroic and human—the 
colossal force and deeds of its chief actors — its vast magnitude 
and long duration, as well as the toils which the conquerors un- 
derwent, and the Nemesis which followed upon their success. 
And these were the circumstances which, set forth in the full 
blaze of epic and tragic poetry, bestowed upon the legend its 
powerful and imperishable influence over the Hellenic mind. 
The enterprise was one comprehending all the members of the 
Hellenic body, of which each individually might be proud, and 
in which, nevertheless, those feelings of jealous and narrow pa- 
triotism, so lamentably prevalent in many of the towns, were as 
much as possible excluded. It supplied them with a grand and 
inexhaustible object of common sympathy, common faith, and 
common admiration ; and when occasions arose for bringing to- 
gether a Pan-Hellenic force against the barbarians, the prece- 
dent of the Homeric expedition was one upon which the elevated 
minds of Greece could dwell with the certainty of rousing an 
unanimous impulse, if not always of counterworking sinister by- 





1 These diversities are well set forth in the useful Dissertation of Fuchs 
De Varietate Fabularum Troicarum (Cologne, 1830). 

Of the number of romantic statements put forth respecting Helen and 
Achilles especially, some idea may be formed from the fourth, fifth and sixth 
chapters of Ptolemy Héphastion (apud Westermann. Seriptt. Mythograph 
p- 188, ete.). 


SPURIOUS TROJAN WAR OF THE HISTORIANS. 321 


motives, among their audience. And the incidents comprised in 
the Trojan cycle were familiarized, not only to the public mind 
but also to the public eye, by innumerable representations both of 
the sculptor and the painter, — those which were romantic and 
chivalrous being better adapted for this purpose, and therefore 
more constantly employed, than any other. 

Of such events the genuine Trojan war of the old epic was 
for the most part composed. Though literally believed, reveren- 
tially cherished, and numbered among the gigantic phenomena 
of the past, by the Grecian public, it is in the eyes of modern 
inquiry essentially a legend and nothing more. If we are asked 
whether it be not a legend embodying portions of historical mat- 
ter, and raised upon a basis of truth,— whether there may not 
really have occurred at the foot of the hill of Ilium a war purely 
human and political, without gods, without heroes, without Helen, 
without Amazons, without Ethiopians under the beautiful son of 
Eés, without the wooden horse, without the characteristic and ex- 
pressive features of the old epical war, — like the mutilated trunk 
of Deiphobus in the under-world; if we are asked whether there 
was not really some such historical Trojan war as this, our an- 
swer must be, that as the possibility of it cannot be denied, so 
neither can the reality of it be affirmed. We possess nothing but 
the ancient epic itself without any independent evidence: had it 
been an age of records indeed, the Homeric epic in its exquisite 
and unsuspecting simplicity would probably never have come 
into existence. Whoever therefore ventures to dissect Homer, 
Arktinus and Leschés, and to pick out certain portions as matters 
of fact, while he sets aside the rest as fiction, must do so in full 
reliance on his own powers of historical divination, without any 
means either of proving or verifying his conclusions. Among 
many attempts, ancient as well as modern, to identify real objects 
in this historical darkness, that of Dio Chrysostom deserves at- 
tention for its extraordinary boldness. In his oration addressed 
to the inhabitants of Ilium, and intended to demonstrate that the 
Trojans were not only blameless as to the origin of the war, but 
victorious in its issue—he overthrows all the leading points of 
the Homeric narrative, and re-writes nearly the whole from be- 
ginning to end: Paris is the lawful husband of Helen, Achilles is 
slain by Hectér, and the Greeks retire without taking Troy, dis 

VOL. I. 14* 2loc. 


322 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


graced as well as baffled. Having shown without difficulty that 
the Iliad, if it be looked at as a history, is full of gaps, incongrui+ 
ties and absurdities, he proceeds to compose a more plausible nar- 
rative of his own, which he tenders as so much authentic matter 
of fact. The most important point, however, which his Oration 
brings to view is, the literal and confiding belief with which the 
Homeric narrative was regarded, as if it were actual history, not 
only by the inhabitants of Ilium, but also by the general Grecian 
public.! 

The small town of Ilium, inhabited by olic Greeks,? and 
raised into importance only by the legendary reverence attached 
to it, stood upon an elevated ridge forming a spur from Mount 
Ida, rather more than three miles from the town and promontory 
of Sigeium, and about twelve stadia, or less than two miles, from 
the sea at its nearest point. From Sigeium and the neighboring 
town of Achilleium (with its monument and temple of Achilles), 
to the town of Rheeteium on a hill higher up the Hellespont 
(with its monument and chapel of Ajax called the Aianteium?), 
was a distance of sixty stadia, or seven miles and a half in the 
straight course by sea: in the intermediate space was a bay and 
an adjoining plain, comprehending the embouchure of the Sca- 
mander, and extending to the base of the ridge on which Ilium 
stood. This plain was the celebrated plain of Troy, in which 
the great Homeric battles were believed to have taken place: the 
portion of the bay near to Sigeium went. by the name of the 
Naustathmon of the Achzans (7. e. the spot where they dragged 
their ships ashore), and was accounted to have been the camp of 
Agamemnon and his vast army.4 





? Dio Chrysost. Or. xi. p. 510-322, 

2 Herodot. v. 122. Pausan. v. 8,3: viii. 12,4. AloAede éx woAewe Toga 
doc, the title proclaimed at the Olympic games; like AloAed¢ &xd Movpivac, 
from Myrina in the more southerly region of JX£olis, as we find in the list 
of visitors at the Charitésia, at Orchomenos in Bodtia (Corp. Inserip. 
Boeckh, No. 1583). 

3 Sce Pausanias, i. 35, 8, for the legends current at Ilium respecting the 
vast size of the bones of Ajax in his tomb. The inhabitants affirmed that 
after the shipwreck of Odysseus, the arms of Achilles, which he was earry- 
ing away with him, were washed up by the sea against the tomb of Ajax 
Pliny gives the distance at thirty stadia: modern travellers make it some 
thing more than Pliny, but considerably less than Strabo. 

* Strabo, xiii. p. 596-598 Strabo distinguishes the ’Ayacdv Natoraduor, 


HISTORICAL ILIUM. 323 


Historical Ilium was founded, according to the questionable 
statement of Strabo, during the last dynasty of the Lydian 
kings,! that is, at some period later than 720 8. c. Until after 
the days of Alexander the Great—indeed until the period of 
Roman preponderance — it always remained a place of inconsid- 
erable power and importance, as we learn not only from the as- 
sertion of the geographer, but also from the fact that Achilleium, 
Sigeium and Rheteium were all independent of it.2 But incon- 
siderable as it might be, it was the only place which ever bore 
the venerable name immortalized by Homer. Like the Homeric 
Ilium, it had its temple of Athéné,3 wherein she was worshipped 
as the presiding goddess of the town: the inhabitants affirmed 
that Agamemnon had not altogether destroyed the town, but that 
it had been reoccupied after his departure, and had never ceased 
to exist.4 Their acropolis was called Pergamum, and in it was 
shown the house of Priam and the altar of Zeus Herkeius where 
that unhappy old man had been slain: moreover there were 
exhibited, in the temples, panoplies which had been worn by the 
Homeric heroes,> and doubtless many other relics appreciated by 
admirers of the Iliad. 





which was near to Sigeium, from the ’Aya:6év Auhy, which was more towards 
the middle of the bay between Sigeium and Rheteium ; but we gather from 
his language that this distinction was not universally recognized. Alexan- 
der landed at the ’AyatGv Ayuqy (Arrian, i. 11). 

1 Swrabo, xiii. p. 593. 

2 Herodot. v. 95 (his account of the war between the Athenians and Mity- 
lenseans about Sigeium and Achilleium) ; Strabo, xiii. p. 593. Ti» dé rav 
Tdiéor rodiv Thy viv Ttéwe piv Kopdrodry elvai dact, Td lepdv Exovoay Tig 
"ADnvac pxpdv Kal ebteAéc. "AXeSavdpov dé dvaBavra pera thy ént Tpavine 
vixny, dvadjwaot Te Kooujoat Td lepdv Kat mpooayopetoat TbALY, ete, 

Again, Kat rd *IMuov, 5 viv éor7?, kaporonic tig hv bre mpOtov ‘Papatos tij¢ 
"Aoiag éréBqoav. 

3 Besides Athéné, the Inscriptions authenticate Zed¢ Todsede at Ilium 
(Corp. Inscrip. Boeckh. No. 3599). | 

4 Strabo, xiii, p. 600. _Aéyovor 5” of viv "liuei¢ Kal TovTo, d¢ ovdé TéhEwe 
ovvéBawvev.hoaviodat thy néAuv Kata Tiy GAwow bxd Tov ’Axaldy, odd’ &&n- 
AeigSy obdérote. — 

The situation of Ilium (or as it is commonly, but erroneously, termed, 
‘New Ilium) appears to be pretty well ascertained, about two miles from the 
sea (Rennell, On the Topography of Troy, . 41-71; Dr. Clarke’s Travels, 
yol. ii. p. 102). 

§ Xerxés passing by Adramyttium, and leaving the range of Mount Ida on 


324 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


These were testimonies which few persons in those ages were 
inclined to question, when combined with the identity of name 
and general locality ; nor does it seem that any one did question 
them until the time of Démétrius of Sképsis.. Hellanikus ex- 
pressly described this Ilium as being the Ilium of Homer, for 
which assertion Strabo (or probably Démétrius, from whom the 
narrative seems to be copied) imputes to him very gratuitously 
an undue partiality towards the inhabitants of the town.! Hero- 
dotus relates, that Xerxés in his march into Greece visited the 
place, went up to the Pergamum of Priam, inquired with much 
interest into the details of the Homeric siege, made libations to 
the fallen heroes, and offered to the Athéné of Ilium his mag- 
nificent sacrifice of a thousand oxen: he probably represented 
and believed himself to be attacking Greece as the avenger of 
the Priamid family. The Lacedemonian admiral Mindarus, 
while his fleet lay at Abydus, went personally to Ilium to offer 
sacrifice to Athéné, and saw from that elevated spot the battle 
fought between the squadron of Dorieus and the Athenians, on 
the shore near Rheteium.?. During the interval between the 





his left hand, jie é¢ tiv "Asada yiv.....-.+. ’"Artkouévov dé Tod oTparot 
éxt tov TKauavdpov,........&¢ Td Tpuduou Wépyapov dvéBn, tuepov Eyov 
Vejoacdat. Oencdpevog dé, kal mudouevog Keivwv Exaata, TF 
"ADnvaty TH lAradt EGvce Bodie yiAiag* yode dé of Hayat Toiow howow éyé- 
avTo. -"Aua juépy 68 exopeveto, év apiotépy péev. drépyov ‘Porteiov 

nodW ar Oppuveiov kat Adpdavonv, hrep 67 "ABidw 5yovpos dori: év dekin 
02, TépytSag Tevxpote (Herod. vii. 43). 

Respecting Alexander (Arrian, i. 11), *AveASovra d& be "Thiov, TH "ANnva 
Vioa TH *TALa01, Kat tiv mavorAiav tiv abtod dvadeivat ele Tay vady, Kal 
Kavedeiv avti Tavtn¢ TOY lepov tiva brAwy Ett éx tod Tpwikod Eoyov oukée 
eva’ kal Tadta Aéyovowy bri of dbnaorioral Edepov mpd adbrov é¢ Tag wayxac. 
Oica: d? abrdv éxt rod Bapod tod Ade rod “Epkeiov Aoyog Karéyet, upviv 
IIpiayov rapaitobpevov Th Neorrodéuov yévet, 6 dy é¢ abrov Kadjxe. 

The inhabitants of Ilium also showed the lyre which had belonged to 
Paris (Plutarch, Alexand. c. 15). 

Chandler, in his History of Ilium, chap. xxii. p. 89, seems to think that 
the place called by Herodotus the Pergamum of Priatn i is different from the 
historical lium. But the mention of the Iliean Athéné identifies them ag 
the same. 

1 Strabo, xiii. p. 602, ‘EAAGviKxog dé yapilopevog roi¢ "TAsedorv, olor 6 
éxeivov pivdoc, cvvyyopel TO Thy abt elvar roAv Thy viv TH TéTe. Hellan- 
ikus had written a work called Tpwika. 

* Xenoph. Hellen. i. 1, 10. Skylax places Ilium twenty-five stadia, or 


RELICS AND MEMORIALS AT ILIUM. 325 


Peloponnesian war and the Macedonian invasion of Persia, ium — 
was always garrisoned as a strong position; but its domaia was 
still narrow, and did not extend even to the sea which was so 
near to it.! Alexander, on crossing the Hellespont, sent his 
army from Sestus to Abydus, under Parmenio, and sailed person- 
ally from Elzeus in the Chersonese, after having solemnly sac- 
rificed at the Eleuntian shrine of Protesilaus, to the harbor of 
the Achzans between Sigeium and Rheteium. He then ascended 
to Ilium, sacrificed to the Iliean Ath@né, and consecrated in her 
temple his own panoply, in exchange for which he took some of 
the sacred arms there suspended, which were said to have been 
preserved from the time of the Trojan war. These arms were 
carried before him when he went to battle by his armor-bearers. 
It is a fact still more curious, and illustrative of the strong work- 
ing of the old legend on an impressible and eminently religious 
mind, that he also sacrificed to Priam himself, on the very altar 
of Zeus Herkeius from which the old king was believed to have 
been torn by Neoptolemus. As that fierce warrior was his heroic 
ancestor by the maternal side, he desired to avert from himself 
the anger of Priam against the Achilleid race.? 





about three miles, from the sca (c. 94). But Ido not understand how he 
can call Sképsis and Kebrén wéAeve éx? Garacop. 

1 See Xenoph. Hellen. iii. i. 16; and the description of the seizure of 
Ilium, along with Sképsis and Kebrén, by the chief of mercenaries, Chari- 
démus, in Demosthen. cont. Aristocrat. c. 38. p. 671: compare Amneas 
Poliorcetic. c. 24, and Polyen. iii. 14. : 

2 Arrian, 1. ce. Diksarchus composed a separate work respecting this 
sacrifice of Alexander, wept tig év *IAiw Svoiac (Athens. xiii. p. 603; 
Dikearch. Fragm. p. 114, ed. Fuhr). 

Theophrastus, in noticing old and venerable trees, mentions the ¢yyoz 
(Quercus esculus) on the tomb of Ilus at Ilium, without any doubt of the 
authenticity of the place (De Plant. iv. 14); and his contemporary, the 
harper Stratonikos, intimates the same feeling, in his jest on the visit of a 
bad sophist to Ilium during the festival of the Ilieia (Athene. viii. p. 351). 
The same may be said respecting the author of the tenth epistle ascribed to 
the orator /Mschinés (p. 737), in which his visit of curiosity to Ilium is 
described —as well as about Apollénius of Tyana, or the writer who 
describes his life and his visit to the Tréad ; it is evident that he did not dis- 
trust the dpyaosoyia of the Tlieans, who affirmed their town to be the real 
Troy (Philostrat. Vit. Apollon. Tyan. iv. 11). 

The godiess Athéné of Ilium was reported to have rendered valnable 


526 HISTORY OF GREECE 


Alexander made to the inhabitants of [lium many munificent 
promises, which he probably would have executed, had he not 
been prevented by untimely death: for the Trojan war was 
amongst all the Grecian legends the most thoroughly Pan-Hel- 
lenic, and the young king of Macedén, besides his own sincere 
legendary faith, was anxious to merge the local patriotism of the 
separate Greek towns in one general Hellenic sentiment under 
himself as chief. One of his successors, Antigonus,! founded the 
city of Alexandreia in the Tréad, between Sigeium and the more 
southerly promontory of Lektum ; compressing into it the inhab- 
itants of many of the neighboring olic towns in the region 
of Ida, —Sképsis, Kebrén, Hamaxitus, Kolénez, and Neandria, 
though the inhabitants of Sképsis were subsequently permitted 
by Lysimachus to resume their own city and autonomous goy- 
ernment. Jlium however remained without any special mark of 
favor until the arrival of the Romans in Asia and their triumph 
over Antiochus (about 190 8. c.). Though it retained its walls 
and its defensible position, Démétrius.of Sképsis, who visited it 
shortly before that event, described it as being then in a state of 
neglect and poverty, many of the houses not even having tiled 
roofs.2 In this dilapidated condition, however, it was still mythi- 





assistance to the inhabitants of Kyzikus, when they were besieged by 
Mithridatés, commemorated by inscriptions set up in Ilium (Plutarch, 
Lucull. 10). 

1 Strabo, xiii. p. 603-607. 

? Livy, xxxv. 43; xxxvii. 9. Polyb. v. 73-111 (passages which proye thas 
Ilium was fortified and defensible about B. c. 218). Strabo, xiii, p. 594, Ka? 
Td "Iduov ©, 6 viv ori, Kapbroric tic Hv, bre mpGrov ‘Pwpaios The "Aciag éxé- 
Bnoav Kat téBadrov ’Avrioyov Tov péyav é« tHe évtd¢ Tod Tadbpov, Sot yoor 
Anphrpio¢g 6 UKippwoc, petpaxiov éexidhunoayv ele tiv moduv Kar’ éxetvove Tod¢ 
Kaipore, obtrac OAtywpnuévyy idetv thy Katotkiay, Gore unde KepaywrTag Exe 
tac ortyac. ‘Hynovavat 63, rode Taddrag mepatwdévrag éx rig Eiporng, cva- 
Bivat pev eic thv woALv deouévove éptuaroc, napaxpijua 8 éxdcreiv did 7d 
aresytotov* torepov & éravépdwo toxe TOAAHY. Elr’ éxaxwoay abriv ma- 
Avy of pera SipGpior, ete. 

This isa very clear and precise statement, attested by an eye-witness. 
But it is thoroughly inconsistent with the statement made by Strabo in the 
previous chapter, a dozen lines before, as the text now stands; for he there 
informs us that Lysimachus, after the death of Alexander, paid great atten- 
tion to Ilium, surrounded it with a wall of forty stadia in cireumference, 
erected a temple, and aggregated to Ilium the ancient cities around, which 


RESPECT SHOWN TO ILIUM. 327 


eally recognized both by Antiochus and by the Roman consul 
Tivius, who went up thither to sacrifice to the Tliean Athéné. 
The Romans, proud of their origin from Troy and Aneas, treat- 
ed Ilium with signal munificence ; not only granting to it immu- 
nity from tribute, but also adding to its domain the neighboring 
territories of Gergis, Rheeteium and Sigeium—and making the 
Tlieans masters of the whole coast! from the Perea (or conti- 





were in a state of decay. We know from Livy that the aggregation of 
Gergis and Rheeteium to Ilium was effected, not by Lysimachus, but by the 
Romans (Livy, xxxviii. 37); so that the first statement of Strabo is not 
only inconsistent with his second, but is contradicted by an independent au- 
thority. 

IT cannot but think that this contradiction arises from a confusion of the 
text in Strabo’s first passage, and that in that passage Strabo really meant to 
speak only of the improvements brought about by Lysimachus in Aleran 
dreia Tréas; that he never meant to ascribe to Lysimachus any improve- 
ments in J/ium, but, on the contrary, to assign the remarkable attention paid 
by Lysimachus to Alerandreia Tréas, as the reason why he had neglected to 
fulfil the promises held out by Alexander to Zlium. The series of facts runs 
thus: —1. Ilium is nothing better than a xéu7 at the landing of Alexander; 
2. Alexander promises great additions, but never returns from Persia to ac- 
complish them ; 3. Lysimachus is absorbed in Alexandreia Tréas, into which 
he aggregates several of the adjoining old towns, and which flourishes under 
his hands; 4. Hence Ilium remained a c®u7 when the Romans entered Asia, 
as it had been when Alexander entered. 

This alteration in the text of Strabo might be effected by the simple trans- 
position of the words as they now stand, and by omitting dre Kal, 7d ére- 
peAndn, without introducing a single new or conjectural word, so that the 
passage would read thus: Mera dé rv éxeivov (Alexander's) reAevriy Avoi- 
paxoc padtora tig ’AAckavdpeiac éxeuergn dn, cvvercopévyc piv 70n br’ ’Avrt- 
yévovu,xal mpoonyopevouévnc’Avtiyéviac, ueTaBarotone dé Tobvoua: (Eoke yap 
ebceBic elvar todc 'AXekavdpov diadetauévove Exeivov mpétepov Krilery éxavb- 
prove woAecc, eh éavtdv) cal véwv Kateokevace Kal Teiyor TepteBarero Soov 
40 oradiov* cvvexice dé eig abtiv Tac KiKAW wéAELE dpyaiag, Hdn KeKaKwpé- 
vac. Kat 0) kal ovvévewe.... .dAewv. If this reading be adopted, the 
words beginning that which stands in Tzschucke’s edition as sect. 27, and 
which immediately follow the last word 7éAewv, will read quite suitably and 
coherently,— Kai 76 "IAcov 0’, 6 viv ori, kapdrodic tig Hv, bre mpOrov ‘Pa- 
peaiot tig "Aciag éxéBnoav, etc., whereas with the present reading of the pas- 
sage they show a contradiction, and the whole passage is entirely confused. 

1 Livy, xxxviii. 39; Strabo, xiii. p. 600. Karéoxanrac d? xa? rd Styecov 
brd tov "lAtéwv bia tiv GreiBerav* bx’ Exeivorg yapty torepov 4 mapaiia 
®aca 7 uixpt AapSavov, kal viv br’ éxeivorg éort. 


828 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


nental possessions) of~Tenedos (southward of Sigeium) to the 
boundaries of Dardanus, which had its own title to legendary 
reverence as the special sovereignty of AZneas. The inhabitants 
of Sigeium could not peaceably acquiesce in this loss of their 
autonomy, and their city was destroyed by the Ilieans. 

The dignity and power of Ilium being thus prodigiously en- 
hanced, we cannot doubt that the inhabitants assumed to them- 
selves exaggerated importance as the recognized parents of all- 
conquering Rome. Partly, we may naturally suppose, from the 
jealousies thus aroused on the part of their neighbors at Sképsis 
and Alexandreia Tréas — partly from the pronounced tendency 
of the age (in which Kratés at Pergamus and Aristarchus at 
Alexandria divided between them the palm of literary celebrity) 
towards criticism and illustration of the old poets—a blow was 
now aimed at the mythical legitimacy of ium. Démétrius of 
Sképsis, one of the most laborious of the Homeric critics, had 
composed thirty books of comment upon the Catalogue in the 
Iliad: Hestizea, an authoress of Alexandreia Tréas, had written 
on the same -subject: both of them, well-acquainted with the 
locality, remarked that the vast battles described in the Lliad 
could not be packed into the narrow space between Ilium and 
the Naustathmon of the Greeks; the more so, as that space, too 
small even as it then stood, had been considerably enlarged since 
the date of the Iliad by deposits at the mouth of the Skaman- 
der.! They found no difficulty in pointing out topographical in- 
congruities and impossibilities as to the incidents in the Tliad, 
which they professed to remove by the startling theory that the 
Homeric Ilium had not occupied the site of the city so called. 
There was a village, called the village of the Ilieans, situated 





1 Strabo, xiii. 599. TLaparidnot 086 Anunrptog Kai THY’ AAeSavdpivny ‘Eorti- 
aay paprupa, Ty ovyypiipacay rept Tie ‘Opjpov "lAradoc, ruvSavopuévyr, el 
rept Thy viv mod 6 moAEuoe cvvéoTH, Kal TO Tpwikdy rédtov rod EaTiv, b pé- 
rage Tie wéhews Kal tio Sardoone 6 rounthe opaler Td piv yap mpd The viv 
¢ TOAewe dpapevor, Tpoxopua elvat THv ToTaudv, boTepov yeyovor. 

The words od éorwv are introduced conjecturally by Grosskurd, the ex 
cellent German translator of Strabo, but they seem to me necessary to make 
the sense complete. 

Hesitea is cited more than once in the Homeric Scholia (Schol. Venet. ad 
Diad. iii. 64; Enstath. ad Iliad. ii. 538). 


a=, CU 


HYPOTHESIS OF AN OLD AND NEW ILIUM- 829 


rather less than four miles from the city in the direction of Mount 
Ida, and further removed from the sea; here, they affirmed the 
“holy Troy” had stood. 

No positive proof was produced to sustain the conclusion, for 
Strabo expressly states that not a vestige of the ancient city re- 
mained at the Village of the Ilieans:! but the fundamental sup- 
position was backed by a second accessory supposition, to explain 
how it happened that all such vestiges had disappeared. Never- 
theless Strabo adopts the unsupported hypothesis of Démétrius as 
if it were an authenticated fact—distinguishing pointedly be- 
tween Old and New Ilium, and even censuring Hellanikus for 
having maintained the received local faith. But I cannot find 
that Démétrius and Hestiza have been followed in this respect 
by any other writer of ancient times excepting Strabo. Ilium 
still continued to be talked of and treated by every one as the 
genuine Homeric Troy : the cruel jests of the Roman rebel Fim- 
bria, when he sacked the town and massacred the inhabitants — 
the compensation made by Sylla, and the pronounced favor of 
Julius Cesar and Augustus,—all prove this continued recogni- 


tion of identity.2 Arrian, though a native of Nicomedia, hold- 


ing a high appointment in Asia Minor, and remarkable for the 
exactness of his topographical notices, describes the visit of 
Alexander to Ilium, without any suspicion that the place with all 
its relics was a mere counterfeit: Aristidés, Dio Chrysostom, Pau- 
sanias, Appian, and Plutarch hold the same language. But 
modern writers seem for the most part to have taken up the 





1 Strabo, xiii. p. 599. Oddéy 0? tyvog o@ferar tie dpxaiac mbACws —eikéd- 
tug: dre yap éxrenopdnuéver Tov KiKAw TéAEwr, Ov TeAéwe J? KaTeoTacpLé- 
var, of AiSot ravtec cic Thy éxeivor avaAmpw pernvéxOgoar. 

2 Appian, Mithridat. c. 53; Strabo, xiii. p. 594; Plutarch, Sertorius, ¢.1; 
Velleius Patere. ii. 23. 

The inscriptions attest Panathenaic games celebrated at Ilium in honor of 
Athéné by the Ilieans conjointly with various other neighboring cities (see 
Corp. Inser. Boeckh. No. 3601-3602, with Boeckh’s observations). The 
valuable inscription No. 3595 attests the liberality of Antiochus Soter to- 
wards the Iliean Athéné as early as 278 B. c, 

3 Arrian, i. 11; Appian ut sup.; also. Aristidés, Or. 43, Rhodiaca, p, 
820 (Dindorf. p, 369). The curious Oratio xi. of Dio Chrysostom, in which 
he writcs his new version of the Trojan war, is addressed to the inhabitar ts 
of Ilium. 


330 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


supposition from Strabo as implicitly as he took it from Démé 
trius. They call Ilium by the disrespectful appellation of Wew 
Tlium — while the traveller in the Tréad looks for Old Ilium as 
if it were the unquestionable spot where Priam had lived and 
moved; the name is even formally enrolled on the best eee Te- 
cently prepared of the ancient Tréad.1 





' The controversy, now half a century old, respecting Troy and the 
Trojan war—between Bryant and his various opponents, Morritt, Gilbert 
Wakefield, the British Critic, ete., seems now nearly forgotten, and I cannot 
think that the pamphlets on either side would be considered as displaying 
much ability, if published at the present day. The discussion was first 
raised by the publication of Le Chevalier’s account of the plain of Troy, in 
which the author professed to have discovered the true site of Old Ilium 
(thé supposed Homeric Troy), about twelve miles from the sea near Bounar- 
bashi. Upon this account Bryant published some animadversions, followed 
up by a second treatise, in which he denied the historical reality of the Trojan 
war, and advanced the hypothesis that the tale was of Egyptian origin (Dis- 
sertation on the War of Troy, and the Expedition of the Grecians as de 
scribed by Homer, showing that no such Expedition was ever undertaken, 
and that no such city of Phrygia existed, by Jacob Bryant; seemingly 1797, 
though there is no date in the title-page: Morritt’s reply was published in 
1798). A reply from Mr. Bryant and a rejoinder from Mr. Morritt, as well 
as a pamphlet from G. Wakefield, appeared in 1799 and 1800, besides an 
Expostulation by the former addressed to the British Critic. 

Bryant, having dwelt both on the incredibilities and the inconsistencies of 
the Trojan war, as it is recounted in Grecian legend generally, nevertheless 
admitted that Homer had a groundwork for his story, and maintained that 
that groundwork was Egyptian. Homer (he thinks) was an Ithacan, de- 
. scended from a family originally emigrant from Egypt: the war of Troy 
was originally an Egyptian war, which explains how Memnén the Ethiopian 
came to take part in it: “upon this history, which was originally Egyptian, 
Homer founded the scheme of his two principal poems, adapting things to 
Greece and Phrygia by an ingenious transposition:” he derived information 
from priests of Memphis or Thébes (Bryant, pp. 102, 108, 126). The “Hpw¢ 
Alyirrtioc, mentioned in the second book of the Odyssey (15), is the Egyp- 
tian hero, who affords, in his view, an evidence that the population of that 
island was in part derived from Egypt. No one since Mr. Byam £ p28 
hend, has ever construed the passage in the same sense. 

Bryant’s Egyptian hypothesis is of no value; but the negative portion of 
his argument, summing up the particulars of the Trojan legend, and eon- 
tending against its historical credibility, is not so easily put aside. Few 
persons will share in the zealous conviction by which Morritt tries to make it 
appear that the 1100 ships, the ten years of war, the large confederacy of 
princes from all parts of Greece, ete., have nothing but what is consonant witk 


LEGEND OF TROY. 331 


Strabo has here converted into geographical matter of fact an 
hypothesis purely gratuitous, with a view of saving the accuracy 
of the Homeric topography ; though in all probability the locali- 
ty of the pretended Old Ilium would have been found open to 
~ difficulties not less serious than those which it was introduced to 
obviate.! It may be true that Démétrius and he were justified in 





historical probability ; difficulties being occasionally eliminated by the plea of 
our ignorance of the time and of the subject (Morritt, p. 7-21). Gilbert Wake- 
field, who maintains the historical reality of the siege with the utmost inten- 
sity, and even compares Bryant to Tom Paine (W. p. 17), is still more 
displeased with those who propound doubts, and tells us that “ grave dispu- 
tation in the midst of such. darkness and uncertainty is a conflict with chi- 
mieras ” ( W, p. 14). 

The most plausible line of argument taken by Morritt and Wakefield is, 
where they enforce the positions taken by Strabo and so many other authors, 
ancient as well as modern, that a superstructure of fiction is to be distin- 
guished from a basis of truth, and that the latter is to be amintained 
while the former is rejected (Morritt, p.5; Wake. p. 7-8). To this Bryant 
replies, that “if we leave out every absurdity, we can make anything plau- 
sible; that a fable may be made consistent, and we have many romances 
that are very regular in the assortment of characters and circumstances: this 
may be seen in plays, memoirs, and novels. But this regularity and corres- 
pondence alone will not ascertain the truth” (Expostulation, pp. 8, 12, 13) 
«“ That there are a great many other fables besides that of Troy, regular and 
consistent among themselves, believed and chronologized by the Greeks, and 
even looked up to by them in a religious view (p. 13), which yet no one now 
thinks of admitting as history.” 

Morritt, having urged the universal belief of antiquity as evidence that 
the Trojan war was historically real, is met by Bryant, who reminds him 
that the same persons believed in centaurs, satyrs, nymphs, augury, aruspicy ; 
Homer maintaining that horses could speak, etc. To which Morritt replies, 
“ What has religious belief to do with historical facts? Is not the evidence 
on which our faith rests in matters of religion totally different in all its 
parts from that on which we ground our belief in history?” (Addit. Re- 
marks, p. 47). 

The separation between the grounds of religious and historical belief is by 
no means so complete as Mr. Morritt supposes, even in regard to modern 
times; and when we apply his position to the ancient Greeks, it will be 
found completely the reverse of the truth. The contemporaries of Herodo- 
tus and Thucydidés conceived their early history in the most intimate con- 
junction with their religion. 

1 For example, adopting his own line of argument (not to mention those 
battles in which the pursuit and the flight reaches from the city to the ships 
and back again), it might have been urged to him, that by supposing the 


332 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


their negative argument, so as to show that the battles described 
in the [liad could not possibly have taken place if the city of 
Priam had stood on the hill inhabited by the Ilieans. But the 
legendary faith subsisted before, and continued without abate- 
ment afterwards, notwithstanding such topographical impossibili- 
ties. Hellanikus, Herodotus, Mindarus, the guides of Xerxés, 
and Alexander, had not been shocked by them: the case of the 
latter is the strongest of all, because he had received the best 
education of his time under Aristotle — he was a passionate ad- 
mirer and constant reader of the Iliad — he was moreover per- 
sonally familiar with the movements of armies, and lived at a 
time when maps, which began with Anaximander, the disciple of 
Thalés, were at least known to all who sought instruction. Now 
if, notwithstanding such advantages, Alexander fully believed in 
the identity of Ilium, unconscious of these many and glaring to- 

graphical difficulties, much less would Homer himself, or the 
Homeric auditors, be likely to pay attention to them, at a period, 
five centuries earlier, of comparative rudeness and ignorance, 
when prose records as well as geographical maps were totally 
unknown.! The inspired poet might describe, and his hearers 





Homeric Troy to be four miles farther off from the sea, he aggravated the 
difficulty of rolling the Trojan horse into the town: it was already sufficiently 
hard to propel this vast wooden animal full of heroes from the Greek Nau- 
stathmon to the town of Ilium. 

The Trojan horse, with its accompaniments Sinon and Laocodn, is one 
of the capital and indispensable events in the epic: Homer, Arktinus, Les- 
chés, Virgil, and Quintus Smyrnzeus, all dwell upon it emphatically as the 
proximate cause of the capture. 

The difficulties and inconsistencies of the movements ascribed to Greeks 
and Trojans in the Iliad, when applied to real topography, are well set forth 
in Spohn, De Agro Trojano, Leipsic, 1814; and Mr. Maclaren has shown 
(Dissertation on the Topography of the Trojan War, Edinburgh, 1822) that 
these difficulties are nowise obviated by removing Ilium a few miles further 
from the sea. 

1 Major Rennell argues differently from the visit of Alexander, employ- 
ing it to confute the hypothesis of Chevalier, who had placed the Homeric 
Troy at Bounarbashi, the site supposed to have been indicated by Démé- 
trius and Strabo: — 

“ Alexander is said to have been a passionate admirer of the Iliad, and 
he had an opportunity of deciding on the spot how far the topography was 
consistent with the narrative. Had h3 been shown the site of Bounarbashi 


CONTINUANCE OF TRE MYTHICAL FAITH IN ILIUM. 339 


would listen with delight to the tale, how Hector, pursued by 
Achilles, ran thrice round the city of Troy, while the trembling 
Trojans were all huddled into the city, not one daring to come out 
even at this last extremity of their beloved prince — and while the 
Grecian army looked on, restraining unwillingly their uplifted 
spears at the nod of Achilles, in order that Hectér might perish 
by no other hand than his; nor were they, while absorbed by 
this impressive recital, disposed to measure distances or calculate 
topographical possibilities with reference to the site of the real 
Ilium.1 The mistake consists in applying to Homer and to the 
Homeric siege of Troy, criticisms which would be perfectly just 
if brought to bear on the Athenian siege of Syracuse, as de- 
scribed by Thucydidés;? in the Peloponnesian war? — but which 





for that of Troy, he would probably have questioned the fidelity either of 
the historical part of the poem or his guides. It is not within credibility, 
that a person of so correct a judgment as Alexander could have admired a 
poem, which contained a long history of military details, and other transactions 
that could not physically have had an existence. What pleasure could he 
receive, in contemplating as subjects of history, events which could not have 
happened? Yet he did admire the poem, and therefore must have found the 
topography consistent : that is, Bounarbashi, surely, was not shown to him for 
Troy  (Reynell, Observations on the Plain of Troy, p. 128). 

Major Rennell here supposes in Alexander a spirit of topographical criti- 
cism quite foreign to his real character. We have no reason to believe that 
the site of Bounarbashi was shown to Alexander as the Homeric Troy, or 
that any site was‘shown to him except Ilium, or what Strabo calls New Ilium. 
Still less reason have we to believe that any scepticism crossed his mind, 
or that his deep-seated faith required to be confirmed by measurement of 
distances. 

1 Strabo, xiii. p. 599. Odd? # rob “Exropoc dé mepipouh 7 rept tiv moder 
Eyer TL evAoyov~ ob yap éore rete Gy h viv, did thy ovvexh Payw H 68 
marae yer reptdpounr. 

? Mannert (Geographie der Griechen und Romer, th. 6. heft 3. b. 8. cap. 
8) is confused in his account of Old and New Ilium: he represents that 
Alexander raised up a new spot to the dignity of having been the Homeric 
Tlium, which is not the fact: Alexander adhered to the received local belief. 
Indeed, as far as our evidence goes, no one but Démétrius, Hestixa, and 
Strabo appears ever to have departed from it. | 

* 3 There can hardly be a more singular example of this same confusion, 
than to find elaborate-military criticisms from the Emperor Napoleon, upon 
the description of the taking of Troy in the second book of the AEneid. 
He shows that gross faults are committed in it, when looked at from the 


834 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


are not more applicable to the epic narrative than they would be 
to the exploits of Amadis or Orlando. 

There is every reason for presuming that the Ilium visited by 
Xerxés and Alexander was really the “holy Ilium” present to 
the mind of Homer; and if so, it must have been inhabited, either 
by Greeks or by some anterior population, at a period earlier than 
that which Strabo assigns. History recognizes neither Troy the 
city, nor Trojans, as actually existing ; but the extensive region 
called Tréas, or the Tréad (more properly Trdéias), is known 
both to Herodotus and to Thucydidés: it seems to include the 
territory westward of an imaginary line drawn from the north- 
east corner of the Adramyttian gulf to the Propontis at Parium, 
since both Antandrus, Kolénz, and the district immediately 
round Ilium, are regarded as belonging to the Tréad.1_ Herodo- 
tus further notices the Teukrians of Gergis? (a township conter- 
minous with Ilium, and lying to the eastward of the road from 
Ilium to Abydus), considering them as the remnant of a larger 
Teukrian population which once resided in the country, and 
which had in very early times undertaken a vast migration from 
Asia into Europe To that Teukrian population he thinks that 
the Homeric Trojans belonged :* and by later writers, especially 
by Virgil and the other Romans, the names Teukrians and Tro« 
jans are employed as equivalents. As the name Trojans is not 
mentioned in any contemporary historical monument, so the 





point of view of a general (see an interesting article by Mr. G. C. Lewis, in the 
Classical Museum, vol. i. p. 205, “ Napoleon on the Capture of Troy”). 

Having cited this criticism from the highest authority on the art of war, 
we may find a suitable parallel in the works of distinguished publicists. The 
attack of Odysseus on the Ciconians (described i in Homer, Odyss. ix. 39-61) is 
cited both by Grotius (De Jure Bell. et Pac. iii. 3, 10) and by Vattel (Droit 
des Gens, iii. 202) as a ease in point in international law. Odysseus is con 
sidered to have sinned against the rules of international law by attacking 
them as allies of the Trojans, without a formal declaration of war. 

1 Compare Herodot. y. 24-122; Thucyd.i,131. The IAsde y7 is a part 
of the Tréad. 

? Herodot. vii. 43. 

* Herodot. vy. 122, cide piv Aloaéac mavrag, bcot tiv "lArada yiv veuovrat, | 
elde 62 TépyiSac, trode dmorepdévrac tév dpyaiwy Tedxpwr. 

For the migration of the Teukrians and Mysians into Europe, see Herodot 
vii. 20; the Ponians, on the Strymén, called themselves theix descendants 

: Herodot. ii. 118; y. 13. 


THE TEUKRIANS. 335 


name Zeukrians never once occurs in the old epic. It appears te 
have been first noticed by the elegiac poet Kallinus, about 
660 B. c., who connected it by an alleged immigration of Teu- 
krians from Kréte into the region round about Ida. Others 
again denied this, asserting that the primitive ancestor, Teukrus, 
had come into the country from Attica,! or that he was of indige- 
nous origin, born from Skamander and the nymph Idea — all 
various manifestations of that eager thirst after an eponymous 
hero which never deserted the Greeks. Gergithians occur in 
more than one spot in Molis, even so far southward as the 
neighborhood of Kymé:? the name has no place in Homer, but 
he mentions Gorgythion and Kebriones as illegitimate sons of 
Priam, thus giving a sort of epical recognition both to Gergis 
and Kebrén. As Herodotus calls the old epical Trojans by the 
name Teukrians, so the Attic Tragedians call them Phrygians ; 
though the Homeric hymn to Aphrodité represents Phrygians 
and Trojans as completely distinct, specially noting the diversity 
of language ;3 and in the Iliad the Phrygians are simply num- 
bered among the allies of Troy from the far Ascania, without in- 
lication of any more intimate relationship.4. Nor do the tales 
which connect Dardanus with Samothrace and Arcadia find 
countenance in the Homeric poems, wherein Dardanus is the son 
of Zeus, having no root anywhere except. in Dardania. The 
mysterious solemnities of Samothrace, afterwards so highly vene. 
rated throughout the Grecian world, date from a period much 
later than Homer ; and the religious affinities of that island as 
well as of Kréte with the territories of Phrygia and Zolis, were 
certain, according to the established tendency of the Grecian 
mind, to beget stories of a common genealogy. 

To pass from this legendary world, — an aggregate of streams 
distinct and heterogeneous, which do not willingly come into con 





' Strabo, xiii. p. 604; Apollodor. iii. 12, 4. 

Kephalén of Gergis called Teukrus a Krétan (Stephan. Byz. v. ’Apicf7), 

2 Clearchus ap. Athene. vi. p. 256; Strabo, xiii. p. 589-616. 

3 Homer, Hymn. in Vener. 116. 

4 Tliad, ii. 863. Asius, the brother of Hecabé, lives in Phrygia on the banks 
of the Sangarius (Iliad, xvi. 717). 

5 See Hellanik. Fragm. 129, 130. ed. Didot: and Kephalén Gergithius ap. 
Steph. Byz. v. ’Apio7. 


836 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


fluence, and cannot be forced to intermix,—:to the clearer 
vision afforded by Herodotus, we learn from him that in the year 
500 Bs. c. the whole coast-region from Dardanus southward to the 
promontory of Lektum (including the town of Ilium), and from 
Lektum eastward to Adramyttium, had been X®olized, or was 
occupied by Aolic Greeks — likewise the inland towns of Skép- 
sis! and Krebén. So thatif we draw a line northward from Adra- 
myttium to Kyzikus on the Propontis, throughout the whole ter- 
ritory westward from that line, to the Hellespont and the Agean 
Sea, all the considerable towns would be Hellenic, with the excep- 
tion of Gergis and the ‘Teukrian population around it, —all the 
towns worthy of note were either Ionic or olic. A century ear- 
lier, the Teukrian population would have embraced a wider range 
—perhaps Sképsis and Krebén, the latter of which places was 
colonized by Greeks from Kyme :? a century afterwards, during 
the satrapy of Pharnabazus, it appears that Gergis had become 
Hellenized as well as the rest. The four towns, Ilium, Gergis, 
Kebrén and Sképsis, all in fofty and strong positions, were distin- 
guished each by a solemn worship and temple of Athéné, and by 
the recognition of that goddess as their special patroness.3 

The author of the Iliad conceived the whole of this region as 
»ecupied by people not Greek, — Trojans, Dardanians, Lykians, 
Lelegians, Pelasgians, and Kilikians. He recognizes a temple 
and worship of Athéné in Ilium, though the goddess is bitterly 





1 Sképsis received some colonists from the Ionic Miletus (Anaximenés 
apud Strabo, xiv. p. 635); but the coins of the place prove that its dialect 
was AZolic.. See Klausen, AZneas und die Penaten, tom. i. note 180. 

Arisbé also, near Abydus, seems to have been settled from Mityléné (Bu- 
stath. ad Iliad. xii 97). 

The extraordinary fertility and rich black mould of the plain around Ili ium 
1s noticed by modern travellers (see Franklin, Remarks and Observations on 
the Plain of Troy, London, 1800, p.44): itis also easily worked: “a couple 
of buffaloes or oxen were sufficient to draw the plough, whereas near Constan- 
tinople it takes twelve or fourteen. 

2 Ephorus ap. Harpocrat. v. KeSpijva. 

3 Xenoph. Hellen. i.1, 10; iii. 1, 10-15. 

One of the great motives of Dio in setting aside the Homeric narrative of the 
Trojan war, is to vindicate Athéné from the charge of having unjustly de- 
stroyed her own city of Iliam (Orat. xi. p. 310: xadcra dud Thy "AVgvar brug 
uh dorm Gdixws Siapdeipac tiv EavTipg ‘T6ALy). 


HOMERIC AND HISTORICAL TROAD. 3837 


hostile to the Trojans: and Arktinus described the Palladium as 
the capital protection of the city. But perhaps the most remark- 
able feature of identity between the Homeric and the historical 
JEolis, is, the solemn and diffused worship of the Sminthian Apollo. 
Chrysé, Killa and Tenedos, and more than one place called Smin- 
thium, maintain the surname and invoke the protection of that 
god during later times, just as they are emphatically described to 
do by Homer.! 

When it is said that the Post-Homeric Greeks gradually Hel- 
fenized this entire region, we are not to understand that the whole 
previous population either retired or was destroyed. The Greeks 
settled in the leading and considerable towns, which enabled them 
both to protect one another and to gratify their predominant tastes. 
Partly by force — but greatly also by that superior activity, and 
power of assimilating foreign ways of thought to their own, which 
distinguished them from the beginning —they invested all the 
public features and management of the town with an Hellenic air, 
distributed all about it their gods, their heroes and their legends, 
and rendered their language the medium of public administration, 
religious songs and addresses to the gods, and generally for com- 
munications wherein any number of persons were concerned. But 
two remarks are here to be made: first, in doing this they could 
not avoid taking to themselves more or less of that which belonged 





1 Strabo, x. p. 473; xiii. p. 604-605. Polemon. Fragm. 31. p. 63, ed. 
Preller. 

Polemon was a native of Ilium, and had written a periegesis of the place 
{about 200 B. c., therefore earlier than Démétrius of Sképsis): he may have 
witnessed the improvement in its position effected by the Romans. He 
noticed the identical stone upon which Palamédés had taught the Greeks to 
play at dice. 

The Sminthian Apollo appears inscribed on the coinsof Alexandreia Tréas ; 
and the temple of the god was memorable even down to the time of the em- 
peror Julian (Ammian. Marcellin. xxii. 8). Compare Menander (the Rhetor) 
mept "ExideckrixOv, iv. 14; apud Ee Collect. Rhetor. t. ix. p. 304; also 
wept Sper daxGy, iv. 17. 

Suiv¥oc, both in the Krétan and the olic dialect, meant a field-mouse : 
the region seems to have been greatly plagued by these little animals. 

Polemo could not have accepted the theory of Démétrius, that Ilium waa 
not the genuine Troy: his Periegesis, describing the localities and relics of 
Ilium, implied the legitimacy of the place as a matter of course. 

VOL. I. 15 220c. 


to the parties with whom they fraternized, so that the result was 
not pure Hellenism; next, that even this was done only im the 
towns, without being fully extended to the territorial domain 
around, or to those smaller townships which stood to the town in 
a dependent relation. The olic and Ionic Greeks borrowed 
from the Asiaties whom they had Hellenized, musical instruments 
and new laws of rhythm and melody, which they knew how to turn 
to account: they further adopted more or less of these violent 
and maddening religious rites, manifested occasionally in self- 
inflicted suffering and mutilation, which were indigenous in Asia 
Minor in the worship of the Great Mother. The religion of the 
Greeks in the region of Ida as well as at Kyzikus was more 
orgiastic than the native worship of Greece Proper, just as that 
of Lampsacus, Priapus and Parium was more licentious. From 
the Teukrian region of Gergis, and from the Gergithes near 
Kymé, sprang the original Sibylline prophecies, and the legend- 
ary Sibyll who plays so important a part in the tale of Eneas: 
the mythe of the Sibyll, whose prophecies are supposed to be 
heard in the hollow blast bursting out from obscure caverns and 
apertares in the rocks,! was indigenous among the Gergithian 
Teukrians, and passed from the Kymzans in olis, along with 
the other circumstances of the tale of AEneas, to their brethren 
the inhabitants of Cumz in Italy: The date of the Gergithian 
Sibyll, or rather of the circulation of her supposed prophecies, is 
placed during the reign of Croesus, a period when Gergis was 
thoroughly Teukrian. Her prophecies, though embodied in 
Greek verses, had their root in a Teukrian soil and feelings; and 
the promises of future empire which they so liberally make to the 
fugitive hero escaping from the flames of Troy into Italy, become 
interesting from the remarkable way in which they were realized 
by Rome# 





Virgil, Eneid, vi- 422:— 
Excisum Eubotce latus ingens rupis it antrum, 
Quo lati ducunt aditus cenitum, ostia centum ; 4 
Unde ruunt totidem voces, responsa Sibyllz. 
* Pansanias, x. 12, 8; Lactantius, i 6, 12; Steph: Byala 
S-hol. Plat. Phedr. p. 315, Bekker. 
The date of this Gergitl ian Sibyll, or of the prophecies passing under her 


LL ee 








LEGEND OF TEOT. 335 


At what time Ilium and Dardanus became olized we have 
no information. We find the Mitylenzans in possession of Si- 
geium in the time of the poet Alkeus, about 600 w.c.; and the 
Athenians during the reign of Peisistratus, having wrested it from 
them and trying to maintain their possession, vindicate the pro 
eveding by saying that they had as much right to it as the Mity- 
lenzeans, “for the latter had no more claim to it than any of the 
other Greeks who had aided Menelaus in avenging the abduction 
of Helen” This is a very remarkable incident, as attesting the 
celebrity of the legend of Troy, and the value of a mythical title 
lishment of the Mitylenzans on that spot must have been suffi 
Gently recent. The country near the junction of the Hellespont 
and the Propontis is represented as originally held? by Bebrykian 
Thracians, while Abydus was first occupied by Milesian colonists 
in the reign and by the permission of the Lydian king Gygés! 
—to whom the whole Tréad and the neighboring territory be- 
longed, and upon whom therefore the Teukrians of Ida must have 
been dependent. This must have been about 700 2. c., a period 


eile it Dene: naRcaitael Doainat, enh Gis “aici io Senin Ok 


calling it in question. 
_Bilansen (Zincas und die Penaten, book ii. p. 205) has worked out os 





Anvaivr. 

$9 "Ueber paper; 9.0b ani of tat reie EADesoi, dort “ED2geur evsefenpl: 

favro Mevtiey rae ‘Etévne dpmayag. In Aschylus (Eumenid. 402) the god- 

dess Athéné claims the land about the Skamander, as having been presented 

to the sons of Théscas by the general vate of the Gueciam chiefs :— 
"And Enapérdpov yiv caragSaroupévg, 

—- “Hy 6) 7 "AyatGy Geroper te cal mpopor 

oe ‘Tév alypoiGror ypnutror Daxor ptya, 

r sich - “Escipar abrémpepwoy cic 7) ity Epol, 

In the days of Peisistratus, it seems Athens was not bold enongh or pow- 

erful enough to advance this vast pretension. 

? Charon of Lampsacus ap. Schol. Apollén. Rhod. ii. 2; Bernhardy ad 

Dionys. Periégét. 805. p. 747. 

3 Such at least is the statement of Strabo (xii. p. 590); thongh snch an 

extent of Lydian rule at that time seems not easy to reconcile with the pro- 

veedings of the subsequent Lydian kings. 


840 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


considerably earlier than the Mitylenzan occupation of Sigeium 
Lampsacus and Pesus, on the neighboring shores of the Propon- 
tis, were also Milesian colonies, though we do not know their date 
Parium was jointly settled from Miletus, Erythre and Parus. 





CHAPTER XVI. 


VRECIAN MYTHES, AS UNDERSTOOD, FELT AND INTERPRETED 
BY TUE GREEKS THEMSELVES. 


TuHE preceding sections have been intended to exhibit a sketch 
of that narrative matter, so abundant, so characteristic and so 
interesting, out of which early Grecian history and chronology 
have been extracted. Raised originally by hands unseen and 
from data unassignable, it existed first in the shape of floating 
talk among the people, from whence a large portion of it passed 
into the song of the poets, who multiplied, transformed and adorn- 
ed it in a thousand various ways. 

These mythes or current stories, the spontaneous and earliest 
growth of the Grecian mind, constituted at the same time the 
entire intellectual stock of the age to which they belonged. They 
are the common root of all those different ramifications into which 
the mental activity of the Greeks subsequently diverged; con- 
taining, as it were, the preface and germ of the positive history 
and philosophy, the dogmatic theology and the professed romance, 
which we shall hereafter trace each in its separate development. 
They furnished aliment to the curiosity, and solution to the vague 
doubts and aspirations of the age; they explained the origin of 
those customs and standing peculiarities with which men were 
familiar ; they impressed moral lessons, awakened patriotic sym- 
pathies, and exhibited in detail the shadowy, but anxious presen- 
timents of the vulgar as to the agency of the gods: moreover 
they satisfied that craving for adventure and appetite for the 


GENERAL REMARKS ON MYTHICAL NARRATIVES. 84) 


marvellous, which has in modern times become the province of 
fiction proper. 

It is difficult, we may say impossible, for a man of mature age 
to carry back his mind to his conceptions such as they stood when 
he was a child, growing naturally out of his imagination and feel- 
ings, working upon a scanty stock of materials, and borrowing 
from authorities whom he blindly followed but imperfectly appre- 
hended. A similar difficulty occurs when we attempt to place 
ourselves in the historical and quasi-philosophical point of view 
which the ancient mythes present to us. We can follow perfect- 
ly the imagination and feeling which dictated these tales, and we 
can admire and sympathize with them as animated, sublime, and 
affecting poetry; but we are too much accustomed to matter of 
fact and philosophy of a positive kind, to be able to conceive a 
time when these beautiful fancies were construed literally and 
accepted as serious reality. 

Nevertheless it is obvious that Grecian mythes cannot be either 
understood or appreciated except with reference to the system of 
conceptions and belief of the ages in which they arose. We 
must suppose a public not reading and writing, but seeing, hear- 
ing and telling — destitute of all records, and careless as well as 
ignorant of positive history with its indispensable tests, yet at the 
same time curious and full of eagerness for new or impressive 
incidents — strangers even to the rudiments of positive philoso- 
phy and to the idea of invariable sequences of nature either in 
the physical or moral world, yet requiring some connecting the- 
ory to interpret and regularize the phenomena before them. Such 
a theory was supplied by the spontaneous inspirations of an early 
fancy, which supposed the habitual agency of beings intelligent 
and voluntary like themselves, but superior in extent of power, 
and different in peculiarity of attributes. In the geographical 
ideas of the Homeric period, the earth was flat and round, with 
the deep and gentle ocean-stream flowing around and returning 
into itself: chronology, or means of measuring past time, there 
existed none; but both unobserved regions might be described, 
the forgotten past unfolded, and the unknown future predicted — 
through particular men specially inspired by the gods, or endow- 
ed by them with that peculiar vision which detected and inter 
preted passing signs and omens. 


342 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


If even the rudiments of scientific geography and physies, now 
so universally diffused and so invaluable as a security against 
error and delusion, were wanting in this early stage of society, 
their place was abundantly supplied by vivacity of imagination 
and by personifying sympathy. ‘The unbounded tendency of the 
Homeric ‘Greeks to multiply fictitious persons, and to construe 
the phenomena which interested them into manifestations of de- 
sign, is above all things here to be noticed, because the form of 
personal narrative, universal in their mythes, is one of its many 
manifestations. Their polytheism (comprising some elements of 
an original fetichism, in which particular objects had themselves 
been supposed to be endued with life, volition, and design) recog- 
nized agencies of unseen beings identified and confounded with 
the different localities and departments of the physical world. 
Of such beings there were numerous varieties, and many grada- 
tions both in power and attributes ; there were differences of age, 
sex and local residence, relations both conjugal and filial between 
them, and tendencies sympathetic as well as repugnant. The 
gods formed a sort of political community of their own, which 
had its hierarchy, its distribution of ranks and duties, its conten- 
tions for power and occasional revolutions, its public meetings in 
the agora of Olympus, and its multitudinous banquets or festi- 
vals.!. The great Olympic gods were in fact only the most exalted 
amongst an aggregate of quasi-human or ultra-human personages, 
+ demons, heroes, nymphs, eponymous (or name-giving) genii, 
identified with each river, mountain, cape, town, village, or known 





1 Homer, Iliad, i. 603; xx. 7. Hesiod. Theogon. 802. 

? ‘We read in the Iliad that Asteropeus was grandson of the beautiful 
river Axius, and Achilles, after having slain him, admits the dignity of this 
parentage, but boasts that his own descent from Zeus was much greater, 
since even the great river Acheléus and Oceanus himself is inferior to Zeus 
(xxi. 157-191). Skamander fights with Achilles, calling his brother Simois 
to his aid (213-308). Tyrd, the daughter of Salméneus, falls in love with 
Enipeus, the most beautiful of rivers (Odyss. xi. 237). Acheléus appears 
as a suitor of Deianira (Sophokl. Trach. 9). 

There cannot be a better illustration of this feeling than what is told of 
the New Zealanders at the present time. The chief Heu-Heu appeals to his 
ancestor, the great mountain Tonga Riro: “Iam the Heu-Heu, and rule 
over you all, just as my ancestor Tonga Riro, the mountain of snow, stands 
above all this land.” (E. J. Wakefield, Adventures in New Zealand, vol. i. 


<a. LC 


PERSONIFYING SYMPATHY AND IMAG&StA SION. 343 


eircumscription of territory, — besides horses, bulls, and dogs, of 
immortal breed and peculiar attributes, and monsters of strange 





ch. 17. p. 465). Heu-Heu refused permission to any one to ascend the moun- 
tain, on the ground that it was his tipuna or ancestor: “ he constantly iden 
tified himself with the mountain and called it his sacred ancestor” (vol. ii. ¢. 
4. p. 113). The mountains in New Zealand are accounted by the natives 
masculine and feminine: Tonga Riro, and Taranaki, two male mountains, 
quarrelled about the affections of a small volcanic female mountain in the 
neighborhood (ibid. ii. c. 4. p. 97). 

The religious imagination of the Hindoos also (as described by Colonel 
Sleeman in his excellent work, Rambles and Recollections of an Indian 
Official), affords a remarkable parallel to that of the early Greeks. Colonel 
Sleeman says, — 

“ T asked some of the Hindoos about us why they called the river Mother 
Nerbudda, if she was really never married. Her Majesty (said they with 
great respect) would-really never consent to be married after the indignity 
she suffered from her affianced bridegroom the Sohun: and we call her 
mother because she blesses us all, and we are anxious to accost her by the 
name which we consider to be the most respectful and endearing. 

- & Any Englishman can easily conceive a poet in his highest calenture of 
the brain, addressing the Ocean as a steed that knows his rider, and patting 


the crested billow as his flowing mane. But he must come to India to un- 


derstand how every individual of a whole community of many millions can 
address a fine river as a living being—a sovereign princess who hears and un- 
derstands all they say, and exercises a kind of local superintendence over their 
affairs, without a single temple in which her image is worshipped, or a 
single priest to profit by the delusion. As in the case of the Ganges, it is 
the river itself to whom they address themselves, and not to any deity residing in it, 
or presiding over it—the stream itself is the deity which fills their imagina- 
tions, and receiyes their homage” (Rambles and Recollections of an In- 
dian Official, ch. iii. p. 20). Compare also the remarks in the same work 
on the sanctity of Mother Nerbudda (chapter xxvii. p. 261); also of the holy 
personality of the earth. “ The land is considered as the MorHER of the 
prince or chief who holds it, the great parent from whom he derives all that 
maintains him, his family, and his establishments. If well-treated, she yields 
this in abundance to her son; but if he presumes to look upon her with the 
eye of desire, she ceases to be fruitful; or the Deity sends down hail or 
blight to destroy all that she yiclds. The measuring the surface of tho 
fields, and the frequently inspecting the crops by the chief himself or his 
immediate agents, were considered by the people in this light— either it 
should not be done at all, or the duty should be delegated to inferior agents, 
whose close inspection of the great parent could not be so displeasing to the 
Deity” (Ch. xxvii. p. 248). 

See also about the gods who are believed to reside in trees — the Peepul- 


844 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


lineaments and combinations, “ Gorgons and Harpies and Chi- 
meras dire.” As there were in every gens or family special gen- 
tile deities and foregone ancestors who watched over its members, 
forming in each the characteristic symbol and recognized guar- 
antee of their union, so there seem to have been in each guild 
or trade peculiar beings whose vocation it was to cooperate or 
to impede in various stages of the business.1 

The extensive and multiform personifications, here faintly 
sketched, pervaded in every direction the mental system of the 
Greeks, and were identified intimately both with their conception 
and with their description of phenomena, present as well as past. 
That which to us is interesting as the mere creation of an exube- 
rant fancy, was to the Greck genuine and venerated reality. 
Both the earth and the solid heaven (Gea and Uranos) were both 
conceived and spoken of by him as endowed with appetite, feel- 
ing, sex, and most of the various attributes of humanity. Instead 
of a sun such as we now see, subject to astronomical laws, and 
forming the centre of a system the changes of which we can 
ascertain and foreknow, he saw the great god Hélios, mounting 
his chariot in the morning in the east, reaching at mid-day the 
height of the solid heaven, and arriving in the evening at the 
western horizon, with horses fatigued and desirous of repose. 





tree, the cotton-tree, ete. (ch. ix. p. 112), and the description of the annual 
marriage celebrated between the sacred pebble, or pebble-god, Saligram, 
and the sacred shrub Toolsea, celebrated at great expense and with a nume- 
rous procession (chap. xix. p. 158; xxiii. p. 185). 
’ See the song to the potters, in the Homeric Epigrams (14): — 

Ei pév ddcerte picdov, detow, & kepauqec* 

Aeip’ dy’ "Adnvain, cat dreipexe xeipa Kapivov. 

Ed d2 pedavdeier KétvAo, kal tavta Kavaotpa 

Dpuxdivai te Kadde, Kat rine Gvov dpéoFat. 

LONE "Hy & éx’ dvardeinv raepdévrec pevdy dpyade, 

LvyKaréw 67 evra Kapuivy SnAnthpac: 

Livrpi’ buwc, Luapaydy re, kat "AcBerov, Hd? LaBaxryr, 

*Quddapuiv 8, b¢ rade Téxvyn Kaka TOAAG Tropicel, etc. 

A certain kindred betwe:n men and serpents (ovyyévevav riva mpd¢ Tods 
dec) was recognized in the peculiar gens of the ddvoyevei¢ near Parion, 
who possessed the gift of healing by their touches the bite of the serpent 
the original hero of this gens was said to have been transformed from a ser 
pent into a man (Strabo, xiii. p. 588). 


GEA, URANOS, HELIOS, ETC. 345 


Hélios, having favorite spots wherein his beautifu. cattle grazed, 
took pleasure in contemplating them during the course of his 
journey, and was sorely displeased if any man slew or injured 
them: he had moreover sons and daughters on earth, and as his 
all-seeing eye penetrated everywhere, he was sometimes in a 
situation to reveal secrets even to the gods themselves — while 
on other occasions he was constrained to turn aside in order to 
avoid contemplating scenes of abomination.! To us these now 
appear puerile, though pleasing fancies, but to an Homeric Greek 





 Odyss. ii. 388; viii. 270; xii. 4, 128, 416; xxiii. 362. Iliad, xiv. 344, 

The Homeric Hymn to Démétér expresses it neatly (63) — 

‘Hédtov & ixovro, deGv oxdrev 708 Kai dvdpav, 
Also the remarkable story of Euénius of Apollénia, his neglect of the sacred 
cattle of Hélios, and the awful consequences of it (Herodot. ix. 93: compare 
Theoer. Idyll. xxv. 130). 

I know no passage in which this conception of the heavenly bodies as Per 
sons is more strikingly set forth than in the words of the German chief 
Boiocalus, pleading the cause of himself and his tribe the Ansibarii before 
the Roman legate Avitus. This tribe, expelled by other tribes from its native 
possessions, had sat down upon some of that wide extent of lands on the 
Lower Rhine which the Roman government reserved for the use of its sol- 
diers, but which remained desert, because the soldiers had neither the means 
nor the inclination to occupy them. The old chief, pleading his cause before 
Avitus, who had issued an order to him to evacuate the lands, first dwelt upon 
his fidelity of fifty years to the Roman cause, and next touched upon the enor- 
mity of retaining so large an area in a state of waste (Tacit. Ann. xiii. 55): 
“ Quotam partem campi jacere, in quam pecora et armenta militum aliquan- 
do transmitterentur? Servarent sane receptos gregibus, inter hominum 
famam: modo ne vastitatem et solitudinem mallent, quam amicos populos 
Chamavorum quondam ea arva, mox Tubantum, et post Usipiorum fuisse. 
Sicuti celum Diis, ita terras generi mortalium datas: queeque vacuz, eas 
publicas esse. Solem deinde respiciens, et cetera sidera vocans, quasi coram 
interrogabat — vellentne contueri inane solum? potius mare superfunderent adver- 
sus terrarum ereptores. Commotus his Avitus,” ete. The legate refused the 
request, but privately offered to Boiocalus lands for himself apart from the 
tribe, which that chief indignantly spurned. He tried to maintain himself in 
the lands, but was expelled by the Roman arms, and forced to seek a home 
among the other German tribes, all of whom refused it. After much wander- 
ing and privation, the whole tribe of the Ansibarii was annihilated: its war- 
riors were dll slain, its women and children sold as slaves. 

I notice this afflicting sequel, in order to show that the brave old chief was 
pleading before Avitus a matter of life and death both to himself and his 
tribe, and that the occasion was one least of all suited for a mere rhetorical 


15* 


846 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


they seemed perfectly natural and plausible. In his view, the 
description of the sun, as given in a modern astronomical treatise. 
would have appeared not merely absurd, but repulsive and im- 
pious. Even in later times, when the positive spirit of inquiry 
had made considerable progress, Anaxagoras and other astrono- 
mers incurred the charge of blasphemy for dispersonifying Hélios, 
and trying to assign invariable laws to the solar phenomena.! 
Personifying fiction was in this way blended by the Homeric 





prosopopeia. His appeal is one sincere and heartfelt to the personal feelings 
and sympathies of Hélios. 

Tacitus, in reporting the speech, accompanies it with the gloss “quasi 
coram,” to mark that the speaker here passes into a different order of ideas 
from that to which himself or his readers were accustomed. If Boiocalus 
could have heard, and reported to his tribe, an astronomical lecture, he would 
have introduced some explanation, in order to facilitate to his tribe the com- 
prehension of Hélios under a point of view so new to them. While Tacitus 
finds it necessary to illustrate by a comment the personification of the sun, 
Boiocalus would have had some trouble to make his tribe comprehend the 
re-ification of the god Hélios. 

1 Physical astronomy was both new and accounted impious in the time of 
the Peloponnesian war: see Plutarch, in his reference to that eclipse which 
proved so fatal to the Athenian army at Syracuse, in consequence of the 
religious feelings of Nikias: ob ydp hveixovro tode dvatKode xat peTewporéayar 
TOTe Kadovpévoug we, ei¢ aitiac dAdyoucg Kal dvvdpere ampovontovg Kal KaTn- 
vaykaopéva Tad StatpiBovrac Td Yeiov (Plutarch, Nikias, c. 23, and Periklés, 
¢. 32; Diodor. xii. 39; Démétr. Phaler. ap. Diogen. Laért, ix. 9, 1). 

“You strange man, Melétus,” said Socratés, on his trial, to his accuser, 
“are you seriously affirming that I do not think Hélios and Seléné to: be 
gods, as the rest of mankind think?” “Certainly not, gentlemen of the 
Dikastery (this is the reply of Melétus), Socrates says that the sun is a stone, 
and the moonearth.” “Why, my dear Melétus, you think you are preferring 
an accusation against Anaxagoras! You account these Dikasts so con- 
temptibly ignorant, as not to know that the books of Anaxagoras are full of 
such doctrines! Is it from me that the youth acquire such teaching, when 
they may buy the books for a drachma in the theatre,and may thus laugh 
me to scorn if I pretended to announce such views as my own— not to men- 
tion their extreme absurdity?” (dAAwg te kai obtwg Gtora Gvta, Plato, Apolog. 
Socrat. c. 14. p. 26). 

The divinity of Hélios and Seléné is emphatically set forth by Plato, Legg. 
X. p. 886-889. He permits physical astronomy only under great restrictions 
and to a limited extent. Compare Xenoph. Memor. iv.7, 7; Diogen. Laért. 
ii. 8; Plutarch, De Stoicor. Repugnent. ¢. 40. p. 1053; and Schaubach ad 
Anaxagore Fragmenta, p. 6. 


te in ite 


FORM OF PEKSONAL NARRATIVE IN THE MYTHES. 347 


Creeks with their conception of the physical phenomena >efore 


them, not simply in the way of poetical ornament, but as a genu- 
ine pertion of their évery-day belief. 

It was in this early state of the Grecian mind, stimulating so 
forcibly the imagination and the feelings, and acting through them 
upon the belief, that the great body of the mythes grew up and 
obtained circulation. They were, from first to last, personal 
narratives and adventures; and the persons who predominated 
as subjects of them were the gods, the heroes, the nymphs, etc., 
whose names were known and reverenced, and in whom every 
one felt interested. ‘To every god and every hero it was consis- 
tent with Grecian ideas to ascribe great diversity of human mo- 
tive and attribute: each indeed has his own peculiar type of 
character, more or less strictly defined; but in all there was a 
wide foundation for animated narrative and for romantic incident. 
The gods and heroes of the land and the tribe belonged, in the 
conception of a Greek, alike to the present and to the past: he 
worshipped in their groves and at their festivals ; he invoked their 
protection, and believed in their superintending guardianship, 
even in his own day: but their more special, intimate, and sym- 
pathizing agency was cast back into the unrecorded past.! To 





1 Hesiod, Catalog. Fragm. 76. p. 48, ed. Diintzer: — 

Evval yap rote dairec Eoav Evvoi te Sowkot, 
?AVavarorc Te Seoior katadvAroug 7 dv8porose. 

Both the Theogonia and the Works and Days bear testimony to the same 
general feeling. Even the heroes of Homer suppose a preceding age, the 
inmates of which were in nearer contact with the gods than they themselves 
(Odyss. viii, 223; Iliad, v. 304; xii. 382). Compare Catullus, Carm. 64; 
Epithalam. Peleds et Thetidos, v. 382-408. 

Menander the Rhetor (following gencrally the steps of Dionys. Hal. Art 
Rhetor. cap. 1-8) suggests to his fellow-citizens at Alexandria Tréas, proper 
and complimentary forms to invite a great man to visit their festival of the 
Sminthia: —Gorep yap ’ AvéA2wva roAAaktc édéyeto 4 TbALC Toig ZprvBiore, 
jvieka &&qv Weodre mpogavicg Exidnpeiv tote aviparote, 
obra Kat o& } moat viv mpoodéxerat (rept ’Encdertix. s. iv. c. 14. ap. Walz. 
Coll. Rhetor. t. ix. p. 304). Menander seems to have been a native of Alez= 
andria Troas, though Suidas calls him a Laodicean (see Walz. Preef. ad t. 
ix. p. xv.-xx.; and wept Zpuivdvaxay, sect. iv. c. 17). The festival of the 
Sminthia lasted down to his time, embracing the whole duration of paganism 


from Homer downwards. 


348 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


give suitable utterance to this general sentiment,—to furnis« 
body and movement and detail to these divine and heroic pre. 
existences, which were conceived only in shadowy outline, — ta 
lighten up the dreams of what the past must have been,! in the 
minds of those who knew not what it really had been — such was 
the spontaneous aim and inspiration of productive genius in the 
community, and such were the purposes which the Grecian 
mythes preéminently accomplished. 

The love of antiquities, which Tacitus notices as so prevalent 
among the Greeks of his day,2 was one of the earliest, the most 
durable, and the most widely diffused of the national propensi- 
ties. But the antiquities of every state were divine and heroic, 
reproducing the lineaments, but disregarding the measure and 
limits, of ordinary humanity. The gods formed the starting-point, 
beyond which no man thought of looking, though some gods were 
more ancient than others: their progeny, the heroes, many of 
them sprung from human mothers, constitute an intermediate link 
between god and man. The ancient epic usually recognizes the 
presence of a multitude of nameless men, but they are intro- 
duced chiefly for the purpose of filling the scene, and of executing 
the orders, celebrating the valor, and bringing out the personality, 
of a few divine or heroic characters It was the glory of bards 
and storytellers to be able to satisfy those religious and patriotic 
predispositions of the public, which caused the primary demand 





1 Pp. A. Miiller observes justly, in his Saga-Bibliathek, in reference to the 
Icelandic mythes, “In dem Mythischen wird das Leben der Vorzeit darges- 
tellt, wie es wirklich dem kindlichen Verstande, der jugendlichen Einbildung- 
skraft, und dem vollen Herzen, erscheint.” 

(Lange’s Untersuchungen iiber die Nordische und Deutsche Heldensage, 
translated from P. A. Miiller, Introd. p. 1.) 

2 Titus visited the temple of the Paphian Venus in Cyprus, “spectata 
opulentid donisque regum, queque alia letum antiquitatibus Greecorum 
genus incerte vetustati adfingit, de navigatione primum consuluit” (Tacit. 
Hist. ii. 4-5). 

3 Aristotel. Problem. xix. 48. Of d& jyeuévec tov dpyaiwy povor haav 
hpwec’ of d& Aaot dvSpwrot. Istros followed this opinion also: but the 
more common view seems to have considered all who combated at Troy as 
heroes (see Schol. Iliad. ii. 110; xv. 231), and so Hesiod treats them (Opp, 
Di. 158). : 

In refer 2nce to the Trojan war, Aristotle says— xaddamep év roi¢ 'Hpwé 
woic mep: Ipiapov uvideverac (Ethic. Nicom. i. 9; compare vii. 1). 





ee eae ee 


GOD AND MEN IN COMMUNION. 349 


for their tales, and which were of a nature eminently inviting and 
expansive. For Grecian religion was many-sided and many 
colored; it comprised a great multiplicity of persons, together 
with much diversity in the types of character; it divinized every 
vein and attribute of humanity, the lofty as well as the mean — 
the tender as well as the warlike — the self-devoting and adven- 
turous as well as the laughter-loving and sensual. We shall here- 
after yeach a time when philosophers protested against such 
identification of the gods with the more vulgar ‘appetites and en- 
joyments, believing that nothing except the spiritual attributes of 
man could properly be transferred to superhuman beings, and 
drawing their predicates respecting the gods exclusively from what 
was awful, majestic and terror-striking in human affairs. Such 
restrictions on the religious fancy were continually on the in- 
crease, and the mystic and didactic stamp which marked the last 
century of paganism in the days of Julian and Libanius, contrasts 
forcibly with the concrete and vivacious forms, full of vigorous 
impulse and alive to all the capricious gusts of the human temper- 
ament, which people the Homeric Olympus.! At present, how- 





? Generation by a god is treated in the old poems as un act entirely human 
and physical (éuéyy — mapeAéfaro) ; and this was the common opinion in 
the days of Plato (Plato, Apolog. Socrat. c. 15. p. 15); the hero Astrabakus 
is father of the Lacedemonian king Demaratus (Herod. vi. 66). [Herodotus 
does not believe the story told him at Babylon respecting Belus (i. 182)] 
Euripidés sometimes expresses disapprobation of the idea (Ion. 350), but 
Plato passed among a large portion of his admirers for the actual son of 
Apollo, and his reputed father Aristo on marrying was admonished in a 
dream to respect the person of his wife Periktioné, then pregnant by Apollo, 
until after the birth of the child Plato (Plutarch, Quest. Sympos. p. 717. 
viii. 1; Diogen. Laért. iii. 2; Origen, cont. Cels. i. p. 29). Plutarch (in Life 
of Numa, c. 4; compare Life of Théseus, 2) discusses the subject, and is in- 
clined to disallow everything beyond mental sympathy and tenderness in a 
god: Pausanias deals timidly with it, and is not always consistent with him- 
self; while the later rhetors spiritualize it altogether. Meander, rept ’Em- 
decxtikGy, (towards the end of the third century B. c.) prescribes rules for 
praising a king: you are to praise him for the gens to which he belongs: 
perhaps you may be able to make out that he really is the son of some god ; 
for many who seem to be from men, are really sent down by God and are ema- 
nations from the Supreme Potency —xoddoi rd piv doxeiv & dvdpOrev eio?, 
7H 0 GAndeia rapa rot Yeod Kkaranéurxovta kai elow dndppotat Svtw¢ Tod 
Kpeitrovoc’ Kai yap ‘Hpaxane évouivero piv ’Auditpbwroc, tH 68 dAnSeia hr 
Nude, Obra kai Baoirede 6 huéepog 7d uév doxeiv 8& avdporav, Tt Cé GAq 


850 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


ever, we have only to consider the early, or Homeric and Hest 
odic paganism, and its operation in the genesis of the mythical 
narratives. We cannot doubt that it supplied the most powerful 
stimulus, and the only one which the times admitted, to the crea- 
tive faculty of the people; as well from the sociability, the gra- 
dations, and the mutual action and reaction of its gods and heroes, 
as from the amplitude, the variety, and the purely human east, 
of its fundamental types. 





Veia Ty KaTaBoAny obpavoter Eye, etc. (Menander ap. Walz. Collect. Rhe- 
tor. t. ix. c. i. p. 218). Again—mept Zurvdiaxdv Zede— yéveciy raiddv 
Sn mrovupyeiv évevonoe —’ArdAAwv Thy "AckAnriod yéveaw £67 nL 0 bp- 
yn oe, p .822-327; compare Hermogenés, about the story of Apollo and 
Daphné, Progymnasm..c. 4; and Julian. Orat. vii. p. 220. 

The contrast of the pagan phraseology of this age (Menander had him- 
self composed a hymn of invocation to Apollo— zepi ’Eyxayioy, c. 3. t. ix. 
y. 136, Walz.) with that of Homer is very worthy of notice. In the Hesi- 
odic Catalogue of Women much was said respecting the marriages and 
amours of the gods, so as to furnish many suggestions, like the love-songs 
of Sapphd, to the composers of Epithalamic Odes (Menand. ib. sect. iv. ¢. 
6. p. 268). . 

Menander gives a specimen of a prose hymn fit to be addressed to the 
Sminthian Apollo (p.320) ; the spiritual character of which hymn forms the 
most pointed contrast with the Homeric hymn to the same god. 

We may remark an analogous case in which the Homeric hymn to Apollo 
is modified by Plutarch. To provide for the establishment of his temple at 
Delphi, Apollo was described as having himself, in the shave of a dolphin, 
swam before a Krétan vessel and guided it to Krissa, where he directed the 
terrified crew to open the Delphian temple. But Plutarch says that this old 
statement was not correct: the god had not himself appeared in the shape 
of a dolphin —he had sent a dolphin expressly to guide the vessel (Plutarch. 
de Solertid Animal. p. 983). See also a contrast between the Homeric 
Zeus, and the genuine Zeus, (4A70:vd¢) brought out in Plutarch, Defect 
Oracul. c. 30. p. 426. 

Illicit amours seem in these later times to be ascribed to the daiuovec : see 
the singular controversy started among the fictitious pleadings of the ancient 
rhetors -— Néuou dvro¢g, xapSévovg kali xadapdc¢ elvac tag lepeiac, iepeia tig 
eipidn aréxwv gépovoa, kal Kpiverat.....i...’AAN’ pei, pact, did Tag TOV 
Satuivav éxiporrqoerce Kat éxtBovade mepitedeioSar* Kal mg obx dvdgror 
Koudyn Td ToLotTov ; Ede yap mpd¢ Td pH ddaipedjvat Thy napSeviay dopEir 
Tt drorpératov, ob piv mpd¢ Td Texev (Anonymi Scholia ad Hermogen. 
Erdoetc, ap. Walz. Coll. Rh. t. vii. p. 162). 

Apsinés of Gadara, a sophist of the time of Diocletian, pretended to be 
a son of Pan (see Suidas, v. ’Apivyc). The anecdote respecting the rivers 
Skamander and Meander, in the tenth epistle ascribed to the orator /ischi- 
nes (p. 737),is curious, but we do not know the date of that epistle. 


STIMULUS TO MYTHOPGIC FACULTY. 351 


Though we may thus explain the mythopeic fertility of the 
iveeks, I am far from pretending that we can render any sufii- 
cient account of the supreme beauty of their chief epic and ar- 
tistical productions. There is something in the first-rate produc- 
tions of individual genius which lies beyond the compass of philo- 
sophical theory: the special breath of the Muse (to speak the 
language of ancient Greece) must be present in order to give 
them being. Even among her votaries, many are called, but few 
are chosen; and the peculiarities of those few remain as yet her 
own secret. 

We shall not however forget that Grecian language was also 
an indispensable requisite to the growth and beauty of Grecian 
mythes — its richness, its flexibility and capacity of new com- 
binations, its vocalic abundance and metrical pronunciation: and 
many even among its proper names, by their analogy to words 
really significant, gave direct occasion to explanatory or illustra- 
tive stories. _Etymological mythes are found in sensible pro- 
portion among the whole number. 

To understand properly then the Grecian mythes, we must try 
to identify ourselves with the state of mind of the original my- 
thopeeic age; a process not very easy, since it requires us to 
adopt a string of poetical fancies not simply as realities, but as 
the governing realities of the mental system;! yet a process 





1 The mental analogy between the early stages of human civilization and 
the childhood of the individual is forcibly and frequently set forth in the 
works of Vico. That eminently original thinker dwells upon the poetical 
and religious susceptibilities as the first to develop themselves in the human 
mind, and as furnishing not merely connecting threads for the explanation 
of sensible phenomena, but also aliment for the hopes and fears, and means 
of socializing influence to men of genius, at a time when reason was yet 
asleep. He points out the personifying instinct (‘‘istinto d’ animazione” ) as 
the spontancous philosophy of man, “to make himself the rule of the uni- 
verse,” and to suppose everywhere a quasi-human agency as the determining 
cause. He remarks that in an age of fancy and feeling, the conceptions and 
language of poetry coincide with those of reality and common life, instead 
of standing apart as a separate vein. These views are repeated frequently 
(and with some variations of opinion as he grew older) in his Latin work 
De Uno Universi Juris Principio, as well as in the two successive redactions 
of his great Italian work, Scienza Nuova (it must be added. that Vico as an 
expositor is prolix, and does not do justice to his own powers of original 
thought): I select the following from the second edition of the latter treatise, 


352 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


which would only reproduce something an#\ogous to our own 
childhood. The age was one destitute both of recorded history 
and of positive science, but full of imagination and sentiment and 
religious impressibility ; from these sources sprung that multitude 
of supposed persons around whom all combinations of sensible 





published by himself in 1744, Della Metafisica Poetica (see vol. v. p. 189 of 
Ferrari’s edition of his Works, Milan, 1836): “ Adunque la sapienza poetica, 
che fu la prima sapienza della Gentilita, dovette incominciare da una Meta- 
fisica, non ragionata ed astratta, qual @ questa or degli addottrinati, ma sentita 
ed immaginata, quale dovett’ essere di tai primi uomini, siccome quelli ch’ 
erano di niun raziocinio, e tutti robusti sensi e vigorosissime fantasie, come 
@ stato nelle degnita (the Axioms) stabilito. Questa fu la loro propria poesia, 
la qual in essi fu una faculta loro connaturale, perche erano di tali sensi e di 
si fatte fantasie naturalmente forniti, nata da ignoranza di cagioni —la qual fu 
loro madre di maraviglia di tutte le cose, che quelli ignoranti di tutte le cose 
fortemente ammiravano. Tal poesia incomincid in essi divina: perché nello 
stesso tempo ch’ essi immaginavano le cagioni delle cose, che sentivano ed 
ammirayano, essere Dei, come ora il confermiamo con gli Americani, i quali 
tutte le cose che superano la loro picciol capacita, dicono esser Dei.....nello 
stesso tempo, diciamo, alle cose ammirate davano I’ essere di sostanze dalla 
propria lor idea: ch’ 8 appunto la natura dei fanciulli, che osserviamo pren- 
dere tra mani cose inanimate, e transtullarsi e favellarvi, come fussero quelle 
persone vive. In cotal guisa i primi uomini delle nazioni gentili, come fan- 
ciulli del nascente gener umano, dalla lor idea creavan essi le cose ......per 
la loro robusta ignoranza, il facevano in forza d’ una corpolentissima fantasia, 
e perch’ era corpolentissima, il facevano con una maravigliosa sublimita, tal 
e tanta, che perturbava all’ eccesso essi medesimi, che fingendo le si crea- 
vano..... . Di questa natura di cose umane restO eterna proprieta spiegata 
con nobil espressione da Tacito, che vanamente gli uomini spaventati fingunt 
simul creduntque.” 

After describing the condition of rude men, terrified with thunder and 
other vast atmospheric phenomena, Vico proceeds (7b. p- 172)—*“ In tal 
caso la natura della mente umana porta ch’ ella attribuisca all’ effetto la sua 
natura: e la natura loro era in tale stato d’ uomini tutti robuste forze di corpo, 
che urlando, brontolando, spiegavano le loro violentissime passioni, si finsero 
il cielo esser un gran corpo animato, che per tal aspetto chiamavano Giove, 
che col fischio dei fulmini e col fragore die tuoni volesse lor dire qualche 
COBB S'5 ove E si fanno di tutta la natura un vasto corpo animato, che senta 
passioni ed affetti.” 

Now the contrast with modern habits of thought : — 

“Ma siccome ora per la natura delle nostre umane menti troppo ritirata 
dai sensi nel medesimo volgo — con le tante astrazioni, di quante sono piene 
le lingue —con tanti vocaboli astratti— e di troppo assottigliata con Y arti 
dello scrivere, e quasi spiritualezzata con la practica dei numeri —ct € natu- 


GRECIAN IMAGINATION AND SENTIMENT. 853 


phznomena were grouped, and towards whom curiosity, sympa- 
thies, and reverence were earnestly directed. The adventures 
of such persons were the only aliment suited at once both to the 
appetites and to the comprehension of an early Greek; and the 
mythes which detailed them, while powerfully interesting his 





ralmente niegato di poter formare la vasta imagine di cotal donna che dicono 
Natura simpatetica, che mentre con la bocca dicono, non hanno nulla in lor 
mente, perocché la lor mente ¢ dentro il falso, che é nulla; né sono soccorsi 
dalla fantasia a poterne formare una falsa vastissima imagine. Cosi ora ci é 
naturalmente niegato di poter entrare nella vasta immaginativa di quei primi uomini, 
le menti dei quali di nulla erano assottigliate, di nulla astratte, di nulla 
spiritualezzate....... Onde dicemmo sopra ch’ ora appena intender si pud, 
affatto immaginar non st pud, come pensassero i primi uomini che fondarono 
la umanita gentilesca.” 

Tn this citation (already almost too long for a note) I have omitted several 
sentences not essential to the general meaning. It places these early divine 
fables and theological poets (so Vico calls them) in their true point of view, 
and assigns to them their proper place in the ascending movement of hu 
man society: it refers the mythes to an early religious and poetical age, in 
which feeling and fancy composed the whole fund of the human mind, over 
and above the powers of sense: the great mental change which has since 
taken place has robbed us of the power, not merely of believing them as they 
were originally believed, but even of conceiving completely that which their 
first inventors intended to express. 

The views here given from this distinguished Italian (the precursor of F. 
A. Wolf in regard to the Homeric poems, as well as of Niebuhr in regard to 
the Roman history) appear to me no less correct than profound; and the 
obvious inference from them is, that attempts to explain (as it is commonly 
called) the mythes (7. e. to translate them into some physical, moral or his- 
torical statements, suitable to our order of thought) are, even as guesses, 
essentially unpromising. Nevertheless Vico, inconsistently with his own 
general view, bestows great labor and ingenuity in attempting to discover 
internal meaning symbolized under many of the mythes; and even lays 
down the position, “che i primi uomini della Gentilita essendo stati sempli- 
Cissimi, quanto i fanciulli, i quali per natura son veritieri: le prime favole 
non poterono finger nulla di falso: per lo che dovettero necessariamente es- 
sere vere narrazioni.” (See vol. v. p. 194; compare also p. 99, Axiom xvi.) 
If this position be meant simply to exclude the idea of designed imposture, 
it may for the most part be admitted ; but Vico evidently intends something 
more. He thinks that there lies hid under the fables a basis of matter of fact 
— not literal but symbolized —which he draws out and exhibits under the 
form of & civil history of the divine and heroic times: a confusion of doc- 
trine the more remarkable, since he distinctly tells us (in perfect conformity 
with the long passage above transcribed from him) that the special matter of 

VOL. I. 230c. 


854 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


emotions, furnished to him at the same time a quasi-history and 
quasi-philosophy: they filled up the vacuum of the unrecorded 
past, and explained many of the puzzling incognita of the pres- 
ent. Nor need we wonder that the same plausibility which cap- 





these early mythes is “ impossibility accredited as truth,”—* che la di lei pro- 
pria materia ¢ 7 impossibile credibile” (p. 176, and still more fully in the first 
rédaction of the Scienza Nuova, b.iii.c, 4; vol. iv. p. 187 of his Works). 

When we read the Canones Mythologici of Vico (De Constantia Philologize, 
Pars Posterior, c. xxx. ; vol. iii. p. 363), and his explanation of the legends 
of the Olympic gods, Herculés, Théseus, Kadmus, ete., we see clearly that 
the meaning which he professes to bring out is one previously put in by 
himself. ‘ 

There are some just remarks to the same purpose in Karl Ritter’s Vor- 
halle Europiischer Volker — Geschichten, Abschn. ii. p. 150 seg. (Berlin, 1820) 
He too points out how much the faith of the old world (der Glaube der Vor- 
welt) has become foreign to our minds, since the recent advances of “ Politik 
und Kritik,” and how impossible it is for us to elicit history from their con- 
ceptions by our analysis, in cases where they have not distinctly laid it out 
for us. The great length of this note prevents me from citing the passage: 
and he seems to me also (like Vico) to pursue his own particular investiga- 
tions in forgetfulness of the principle laid down by himself. 

1 OQ. Muller, in his Prolegomena zu einer wissenschafilichen Mythologie (cap. 
iv. p. 108), has pointed out the mistake of supposing that there existed ori- 
ginally some nucleus of pure reality as the starting-point of the mythes, and 
that upon this nucleus fiction was superinduced afterwards: he maintains 
that the real and the ideal were blended together in the primitive conception 
of the mythes. Respecting the general state of mind out of which the mythes 
grew, see especially pages 78 and 110 of that work, which is everywhere full 
of instruction on the subject of the Grecian mythes, and is eminently sug- 
gestive, even where the positions of the author are not completely made out. 

The short Heldensage der Griechen by Nitasch (Kiel, 1842, t. vy.) contains more 
of just and original thought on the subject of the Grecian mythes than any 
work with which I am acquainted. I embrace completely the subjective 
point of. view in which he regards them; and although I have profited much 
from reading his short tract, I may mention that before I ever saw it, I had 
enforced the same reasonings on the subject in an article in the Westminster 
Review, May 1843, on the Heroen-Geschichten of Niebuhr. 

Jacob Grimm, in the preface to his Deutsche Mythologie p.1, 1st edit. G6tt. 
1835), pointedly insists on the distinction between “ Sage” and history, as 
wellas upon the fact that the former has its chief root in religious belief 
“Legend and history (he says) are powers each by itself, adjoining indeed 
on the confines, but having each its own separate and exclusive ground; ” 
als3 p. xxvii. of the same introduction. 

A view substantially similar is adopted by William Grimm, the other of 
the two distinguished brothers whose labors have so much elucidated Teu 


EARLY GREEK POETS. 353 


tivated his imagination and his feelings was sufficient to engender 
spontaneous belief; or rather, that no question as to truth or 
falsehood of the narrative suggested itself to his mind. His 
faith is ready, literal and uninquiring, apart from all thought of 
discriminating fact from fiction, or of detecting hidden and sym- 
bolized meaning; it is enough that what he hears be intrinsically 
plausible and seductive, and that there be no special cause to pro- 
voke doubt. And if ‘indeed there were, the poet overrules such 
doubts by the holy and all-sufficient authority of the Muse, whose 
omniscience is the warrant for his recital, as her inspiration is 
the cause of his success. 

The state of mind, and the relation of speaker to hearers, thus 
depicted, stand clearly marked in the terms and tenor of the an- 
cient epic, if we only put a plain meaning upon what we read. 
The poet —like the prophet, whom he so much resembles — 
sings under heavenly guidance, inspired by the goddess to whom 
he has prayed for her assisting impulse: she puts the word into 
his mouth and the incidents into his mind: he is a privileged man, 
chosen as her organ and speaking from her revelations. As‘the 





tonic philology and antiquities. He examines the extent to which either his- 
torical matter of fact or historical names can be traced in the Deutsche Helden- 
sage ; and he comes to the conclusion that the former is next to nothing, the 
latter not considerable. He draws particular attention to the fact, that the 
audience for whom these poems were intended had not learned to distin- 
guish history from poetry (W. Grimm, Deutsche Heldensage, pp. 8, 337, 342 
845, 399, Gott. 1829). 
! Hesiod, Theogon. 32. — 

Soave shone évérrvevoar 6é (the Muses) poe addy, 

Ocinv, O¢ KAciouu TA 7’ Ecodpueva, mpd 7’ édvra, 

Kai pe Kédovl? tpveiv paxadpwr yévog ait tévTwr, ete. 
Odyss. xxii. 347 ; viii. 63, 73, 481,489. Ajpuddox’...... h o& ye Moto’ édidaée, 
Aide raic, } céy’ Aw6AAwv : that is, Demodocus has either been inspired as 
a poet by the Muse, or as a prophet by Apollo: for the Homeric Apollo is 
not the god of song. Kalchas the prophet receives his inspiration from 
Apollo, who confers upon him the same knowledge both of past and future 
as the Muses give to Hesiod (Iliad, i. 69): — 

 Kédyac Ocoropidne, oiwvotbAwv by’ aproro¢ 

"Oc yon Ta 7 bdvTa, Ta 7’ Eoodmeva, mpd T’ evra 

"Hy 01a pavtrocbyny, tiv ol rope BoiGoc "ATbAAwY, 
Also Iliad, ii. 485, 

Both the pavric and the doiddc are standing, recognized professions (Odysa 

xvii. 883), like the physician and the carpenter, dnutdepyot. 


856 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Muse grants the gift of song to whem she will, sc she sometimes 
in her anger snatches it away, and the most constmmate human 
genius is then left silent and helpless.' It is true that these ex- 
pressions, of the Muse inspiring and the poet singing a tale of 
past times, have passed from the ancient epic to compositions pro- 
duced under very different circumstances, and have now degen-« 
erated into unmeaning forms of speech; but they gained cur- 
rency originally in their genuine and literal acceptation. If poets 
had from the beginning written or recited, the predicate of sing- 
ing would never have been ascribed to them; nor would it have 
ever become customary to employ the name of the Muse as a 
die to be stamped on licensed fiction, unless the practice had be- 
gun when her agency was invoked and hailed in perfect good 
faith. Belief, the fruit of deliberate inquiry and a rational scru- 
tiny of evidence, is in such an age unknown: the simple faith of 
the time slides in unconsciously, when the imagination and feel- 
ing ate exalted ; and inspired authority is at once understood, 
easily admitted, and implicitly confided in. 

The word mythe (uvdos, fabula, story), in its original mean- 
ing, signified simply a statement or current narrative, without any 
connotative implication either of truth or falsehood, Subse- 
quently the meaning of the word (in Latin and English as well as 
in Greek) changed, and came to carry with it the idea of an old 
personal narrative, always uncertified, sometimes untrue or avow- 
edly fictitious.2 And this change was the result of a silent alter- 
ation in the mental state of the society, — of a transition on the 

1 Tliad, ii. 599. 

? In this later sense it stands pointedly opposed to loropia, history, which 
seems originally to have designated matter of fact, present and seen by the 
describer, or the result of his personal inquiries (see Herodot. i. 1; Verrius 
Flace. ap. Aul. Gell. v. 18; Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. iii. 12; and the observa- 
tions of Dr. Jortin, Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, vol. i. p. 59). 

The original use of the word Aéyo¢ was the same as that of uidor—a 
current tale, true or false, as the case might be; and the term designating a 
person much conversant with the old legends (Adyto¢) is derived from it 
(Herod. i. 1; ii. 3). Hekateeus and Herodotus both use Adyo¢ in this sense. 
Herodotus calls both Ausop and Hekatwxus Aoyozovoé (ii. 134-143). 

Aristotle (Metaphys. i. p. 8, ed. Brandis) seems to use “iVog in this sense, 
where he says —d kal giddpvdoc 6 giAdcopig wH¢ eotivs 6 yap pidor 
ovykeitat éx Yavuaciwr, etc. In the same treatise (xi. p. 254), he uses it to 


signify falulous amplification and transformation of a doctrine true in the 
main. 





FAITH IN THE EARLY MYTHES. 357 


part of the superior minds (and more or less on the part of all) 
to a stricter and more elevated canon of credibility, in conse: 
quence of familiarity with recorded history, and its essential tests, 
affirmative as well as negative. Among the original hearers of 
the mythes, all such tests were unknown; they had not yet learn. 
ed the lesson of critical disbelief; the mythe passed unquestioned 
from the mere fact of its currency, and from its harmony with 
existing sentiments and preconceptions. The very circumstances 
which contributed to rob it of literal belief in after-time, strength- 
ened its hold upon the mind of the Homeric man. He looked for 
wonders and unusual combinations in the past; he expected to 
hear of gods, heroes and men, moving and operating together 
upon earth; he pictured to himself the fore-time as a theatre in 
which the gods interfered directly, obviously and frequently, for 
the protection of their favorites andthe punishment of their foes. 
The rational conception, then only dawning in his mind, of a sys- 
tematic course of nature was absorbed by this fervent and lively 
faith. And if he could have been supplied with as perfect and 
philosephical a history of his own real past time, as we are now 
enabled to furnish with regard to the last century of England or 
France, faithfully recording all the successive events, and ac- 
counting for them by known positive laws, but introducing no 
special interventions of Zeus and Apollo—such a history would 
have appeared to him not merely unholy and wnimpressive, but 
destitute of all plausibility or title to credence. It would have 
provoked in him the same feeling of incredulous aversion as a 
description of the sun (to repeat the previous illustration) in a 
modern book on scientific astronomy. 

To us these mythes are interesting fictions; to the Homeric 
and Hesiodic audience they were “rerum divinarum et huma- 
narum scientia,”—an aggregate of religious, physical and his- 
torical revelations, rendered more captivating, but not less true 
and real, by the bright coloring and fantastic shapes in which they 
were presented. Throughout the whole of “mythe-bearing Hel- 
las”! they formed the staple of the uninstructed Greek mind, 





1M. Ampére, in his Histoire Littéraire de la France (ch. viii. v. i. p. 310) 
distinguishes the Saga (which corresponds as nearly as possible with the 
Greek pitoc, Adyoc, éxttyoptog Adyoc), as a special product of the intellect. 


858 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


upon which history and philosophy were by so slow degrees su- 
perinduced ; and they continued to be the aliment of ordinary 
thought and conversation, even after history and philosophy had 
partially supplanted the mythical faith among the leading men, 
and disturbed it more or less in the ideas of all. The men, the 
women, and the children of the remote démes and villages of 
Greece, to whom Thucydidés, Hippocratés, Aristotle, or Hippar- 
chus were unknown, still continued to dwell upon the local fables 
which formed their religious and patriotic antiquity. And Pau- 
sanias, even in his time, heard everywhere divine or heroic le- 
gends yet alive, precisely of the type of the old epic; he found 
the conceptions of religious and mythical faith, coéxistent with 
those of positive science, and contending against them at more 
or less of odds, according to the temper of the individual. Now 
it is the remarkable characteristic of the Homeric age, that no 
such coéxistence or contention had yet begun. The religious 
and mythical point of view covers, for the most part, all the 
phenomena of nature; while the conception of invariable se- 
quence exists only in the background, itself personified under the 
name of the Mere, or Fates, and produced generally as an ex- 
ception to the omnipotence of Zeus for all ordinary purposes. 





not capable of being correctly designated either as history, or as fiction, oF 
as philosophy : — 

* fl est un pays, la Scandinavie, od la tradition racontée s’est développée 
plus complétement qu’ailleurs, ol ses produits ont été plus soigneusement 
recueillis et mieux conservés: dans ce pays, lis ont regu un nom. particulier, 
dont P’équivalent exact ne se trouve pas hors des langues Germaniques : c'est 
le mot Saga, Sage, ce qu’on dit, ce qu’on raconte, — 1a tradition orale, Si l’on 
prend ce mot non dans une acception restreinte, mais dans le sens général 
oi le prenait Niebuhr quand il Pappliquoit, par exemple, aux traditions popu- 
laires qui ont pu fournir 4 Tite Live une portion de son histoire, la Saga 
doit étre comptée parmi les produits spontanés de l'imagination humaine. 
La Saga ason existence propre comme la poésie, comme Vhistoire, comme 
le roman. Elle n'est pas la poésie, parcequ’elle n’est pas chantée, mais par- 
lée ; elle n’est pas Vhistoire, parcequ’elle est denuée de critique; elle n’est 
pas le roman, parcequ’elle est sincére, parcequ’elle a foi & ce qu’elle raconte. 
Elle n’invente pas, mais répete: elle peut se tromper, mais elle ne ment 
jamais. Ce récit souvent merveilleux, que personne ne fabrique sciemment, 
et que tout le monde altére et falsifie sans le vouloir, qui se perpétue 4 la 
maniere des chants primitifs et populaires, — ce récit, quand il se rapporte 
bon & un héros, mais 4 un saint, s’appelle une légende.” 


a i el rl 





ee ee, 


NO OTHER LEARNING EXCEPT THE MYTHES. 359 


Voluntary agents, visible and invisible, impel and govern every: 
thing. Moreover this point of view is universal throughout the 
community, — adopted with equal fervor, and carried out with 
equal consistency, by the loftiest minds and by the lowest. The 
great man of that day is he who, penetrated like others with the 
general faith, and never once imagining any other system of na- 
ture than the agency of these voluntary Beings, can clothe them 
in suitable circumstances and details, and exhibit in living body 
and action those types which his hearers dimly prefigure. Such 
men were the authors of the Iliad and the Odyssey; embodying 
in themselves the whole measure of intellectual excellence which 
their age was capable of feeling: to us, the first of poets —but 
to their own public, religious teachers, historians, «and philoso- 
phers besides—inasmuch as all that then represented history 
and philosophy was derived from those epical effusions and from 
others homogeneous with them. Herodotus recognizes Homer 
and Hesiod as the main authors of Grecian belief respecting the 
names and generations, the attributes and agency, the forms and 
the worship of the gods.! 

History, philosophy, etc., properly so called and conforming to 
our ideas (of which the subsequent Greeks were the first crea- 
tors), never belonged to more than a comparatively small num- 
ber of thinking men, though their influence indirectly affected 
more or less the whole national mind. But when positive science 
and criticism, and the idea of an invariable sequence of events, 
came to supplant in the more vigorous intellects the old mythical 
creed of omnipresent personification, an inevitable scission’ was 
produced between the instructed few and the remaining commu- 
nity. The opposition between the scientific and the religious 
point of view was not slow in manifesting itself: in general Jan- 
guage, indeed, both might seem to stand together, but in every 
particular case the admission of one involved the rejection of the 
other. According to the theory which then became. predom- 
inant, the course of nature was held to move invariably on, by 
powers and attributes of its own, unless the gods chose. to inter- 
fere and reverse it; but they had the power of interfering as 
often and to as great an extent as they thought fit. Here the 





1 Herodot. ii. 53. 


860 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


question was at once opened, respecting a great variety of partic- 
ular phenomena, whether they were to be regarded as natural 
or miraculous. No constant or discernible test could be suggest- 
ed to discriminate the two: every man was called upon to settle 
the doubt for himself, and each settled it according to the extent 
of his knowledge, the force of his logic, the state of his health, 
his hopes, his fears, and many other considerations affecting his 
separate conclusion. In a question thus perpetually arising, and 
full of practical consequences, instructed minds, like Periklés, 
Thucydidés, and Euripidés, tended more and more to the scien- 
tific point of view,! in cases where the general public were con- 
stantly gravitating towards the religious. 





1 See Plutarch, Perikl. capp. 5, 32,38; Cicero, De Republ. i. 15-16, ed. 

Maii. ee 
The phytologist Theophrastus, in his valuable collection of facts respect- 
ing vegetable organization, is often under the necessity of opposing his sci- 
entific interpretation’ of curious incidents in the vegetable world to the 
religious interpretation of them which he found current. Anomalous phx- 
nomena in the growth or decay of trees were construed as signs from the 
gods, and submitted to a prophet for explanation (see Histor. Plantar. ii. 3, 
iv. 16; v. 3). 
- We may remark, however, that the old faith had still a certain hold over 
his mind. In commenting on the story of the willow-tree at Philippi, and 
the venerable old plane-tree at Antandros (more than sixty feet high, and 
requiring four men to grasp it round in the girth), having been blown down 
by a high wind, and afterwards spontaneously resuming their erect posture, 
he offers some explanations how such a phenomenon might have happened, 
but he admits, at the end, that there may be something extra-natural in the 
case, ’AAAA raira piv lowe Ew Gvotkie aitiac Eoriv, etc. (De Caus. Plant. v, 
4): see a similar miracle in reference to the cedar-tree of Vespasian (Tacit. 
Hist. ii. 78). 

Euripidés, in his lost tragedy called MeAavixrn Zog?, placed in the mouth 
of Melanippé a formal discussion and confutation of the whole doctrine of 
tépara, or supernatural indications (Dionys. Halicar. Ars Rhetoric. p. 300- 
356, Reisk). Compare the Fables of Phzdrus, iii. 3; Plutarch, Sept. Sap. 
Conviv. ch. 3. p. 149; and the curious philosophical explanation by which 
the learned men of Alexandria tranquillized the alarms of the vulgar, on 
occasion of the serpent said to have been seen entwined round the head of 
the crucified Kleomenés (Plutarch, Kleomen. c. 39). 

It is one part of the duty of an able physician, according to the Hippo- 
cratic treatise called Prognosticon (c. 1. t. ii. p. 112, ed. Littré), when he 
visits his patient, to examire whether there is anything divine in the malady, 
Gua dé Kat cl re Yeiov tveo-iw év tHor votcoror: this, however, does not agree 


MYTHOPGIC AGE. 861 


The age immediately prior to this unsettled condition of thought 
is the really mythopceic age; in which the creative faculties of 
the society know no other employment, and the mass of the so- 
ceity no other mental demand. The perfect expression of such a 
period, in its full peculiarity and grandeur, is to be found in the 
liad and Odyssey, — poems of which we cannot determine the 
exact date, but which seem both to have existed prior to the first 
Olympiad, 776 B. c., our earliest trustworthy mark of Grecian 
time. Jor some time after that event, the mythopeic tendencies 
continued in vigor (Arktinus, Leschés, Eumélus, and seemingly 
most of the Hesiodic poems, fall within or shortly after the first 
century of recorded Olympiads); but from and after this first 
century, we may trace the operation of causes which gradually 
enfeebled and narrowed them, altering the point of view from 
which the mythes were looked at. What these causes were, it 
will be necessary briefly to intimate. 





with the memorable doctrine laid down in the treatise, De Aére, Locis et 
Aquis (c. 22. p. 78, ed. Littré), and cited hereafter, in this chapter. . Nor 
does Galen seem to have regarded it as harmonizing with the general views 
of Hippocratés. In the excellent Prolegomena of Mr. Littré to his edition 
of Hippocratés (t. i. p. 76) will be found an inedited scholium, wherein the 
opinion of Baccheius and other physicians is given, that the affections of the 
plague were to be looked upon as divine, inasmuch as the disease came from 
God ; and also the opinion of Xenophon, the friend of Praxagoras, that the 
“genus of days of crisis” in fever was divine; “For (said Xenophén) just 
as the Dioskuri, being gods, appear to the mariner in the storm and bring 
him salvation, so also do the days of crisis, when they arrive, in fever.” 
Galen, in commenting upon this doctrine of Xenophén, says that the author 
“has expressed his own individual feeling, but has no way set forth the 
opinion of Hippocratés :” 'O dé tév Kpiciuw yévoc huepGv eixdv eivat Seiov, 
éavtod tt madoc Gpordynoev* ob phy ‘lxroKxpatoug ye tiv yrounv Edersev 
(Galen, Opp. t. v. p. 120, ed. Basil). 

The comparison of the Dioskuri appealed to by Xenophon is a precise 
reproduction of their function as described in the Homeric Hymn (Hymn 
xxxiii. 10): his personification of the “days of crisis” introduces the old 
religious agency to fill up a gap in his medical science. 

I annex an illustration from the Hindoo vein of thought :— “It is a rule 
with the Hindoos to bury, and not to burn, the bodies of those who die of 
the small-pox: for (say they) the small pox is not only caused by the god- 
dess Davey, butis, in fact, Davey herself; and to burn the body of a person 
affected with this disease, is, in reality, neither more nor less than to burn tha 
goddess.” (Sleeman, Rambles and Recollections, ete vol. i. ch. xxv. p. 221.) 


VOL. t. 16 


362 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


The foremost and most general of all is, the expansive force 
of Grecian intellect itself, —a quality in which this remarkable 
people stand distinguished from all their neighbors and contempo- 
raries. Most, if not all nations have had mythes, but no nation 
except the Greeks have imparted to them immortal charm and 
universal interest ; and the same mental capacities, which raised 
the great men of the poetic age to this exalted levél, also pushed 
forward their successors to outgrow the early faith in which the 
mythes had been generated and accredited. 

One great mark, as well as means, of such intellectual expan- 
sion, was the habit of attending to, recording, and combining, posi- 
tive and present facts, both domestic and foreign. In the genu- 
ine Grecian epic, the theme was an unknown and aoristic past; 
but even as early as the Works and Days of Hesiod, the present 
begins to figure: the man who tills the earth appears in his own 
solitary nakedness, apart from gods and heroes — bound indeed 
by serious obligations to the gods, but contending against many 
difficulties which are not to be removed by simple reliance on 
their help. The poet denounces his age in the strongest terms as 
miserable, degraded and profligate, and looks back with reveren- 
tial envy to the extinct heroic races who fought at Troy and 
Thébes. Yet bad as the present time is, the Muse condescends 
to look at it along with him, and to prescribe rules for human life— 
with the assurance that if a man be industrious, frugal, provi- 
dent, just and friendly in his dealings, the gods will recompense him 
with affluence and security. Nor does the Muse disdain, while 
holding out such promise, to cast herself into the most: homely de- 
tails of present existence and to give advice thoroughly practical 
and calculating. Men whose minds were full of the heroes of 
Homer, called Hesiod in contempt the poet of the Helots; and 
the contrast between the two is certainly a remarkable proof of 
the tendency of Greek poetry towards the present and the 
positive. 

Other manifestations of the same tendency become visible in 
the age of Archilochus (B. c. 680-660). In an age when metri- 
cal. composition and the living voice are the only means. whereby 
the productive minds of a community make themselves felt, the 
invention of a new metre, new forms of song and recitaticm, of 


INCREASED ATTENTION TO PRESENT FACTS. 368 


diversified accompanimeats, constitute an epoch. The iambic, 
elegiac, choric, and lyric poetry, from Archilochus downwards, all 
indicate purposes in the poet, and impressibilities of the hearers, 
very different from those of the ancient epic. In all of themthe 
personal feeling of the poet and the specialties of present 
time and place, are brought prominently forward, while in the 
Homeric hexameter the poet is a mere nameless organ of the 
historical Muse — the hearers are content to learn, believe, and 
feel, the incidents of a foregone world, and the tale is hardly less 
suitable to one time and place than to another. The iambic me- 
tre (we are told) was first suggested to Archilochus by the bitter- 
ness of his own private antipathies; and the mortal wounds in- 
flicted by his lampoons, upon the individuals against whom they 
were directed, still remain attested, though the verses themselves 
have perished. It was the metre (according to the well-known 
judgment of Aristotle) most nearly approaching to common 
speech, and well suited both to the coarse vein of sentiment, and 
to the smart and emphatic diction of its inventor. Simonidés of 
Amorgus, the younger contemporary of Archilochus, employed 
the same metre, with less bitterness, but with an anti-heroic ten- 
dency not less decided. His remaining fragments present a mix- 
ture of teaching and sarcasm, having a distinct bearing upon 
actual life,2 and carrying out the spirit which partially appears 
in the Hesiodic Works and Days. Of Alkeus and Sapphé, 
though unfortunately we are compelled to speak of them upon 
hearsay only, we know enough to satisfy us that their own per- 
sonal sentiments and sufferings, their relations private or public 





1 Horat. de Art. Poet. 79: — 
“ Archilochum proprio rabies armavit Iambo,” ete. 
Gacopars Epist. i. 19, 23, and Epod. vi. 12; Aristot. Rhetor. iii. 8, 7, and 
Poetic. c. 4— also Synesius de Sientitia natal "A2Kaiog Kal ’Apyidoyoc, 
oi dedaraviKact tiv evotouiav eit Tov olxetov Biov éxarepog (Alexi Frag- 
ment. Halle, 1810, p. 205). Quintilian speaks in striking language of the 
power of expression manifested by Archilochus (x. 1, 60). 

* Simonidés of Amorgus touches briefly, but in a tone of contempt upon 
the Trojan war—yvvarxcdc obvex’ dudidnptopévove (Simonid. Fragm. 
8, p. 36.-v. 118); he seems to think it absurd that so destructive a struggie 
should haye taken Place “ ‘ pro und mulierculd,” to use the phrase of Mi. Payne 
Knight. 


364 HISTOKY OF GREECE. 


with tne contemporary world, constituted the soul of those short 
effusions which gave them so much celebrity :! and in the few re- 
mains of the elegiac poets preserved to us — Kallinus, Mimner: 
mus, Tyrteeus — the. impulse of some present motive or circum 
stance is no less conspicuous. ‘The same may also be said of So 
lon, Theognis and Phokylidés, who preach, encourage, censure, ot 
complain, but do not recount—and in whom a profound ethical 
sensibility, unknown to the Homeric poems, manifests itself: the 
form of poetry (to use the words of Soldn himself) is made the 
substitute for the public speaking of the agora.2 

Doubtless all these poets made abundant use of the ancient 
mythes, but it was by turning them to present account, in the 
way of illustration, or flattery, or contrast,—a tendency which 
we may usually detect even in the compositions of Pindar, in 
spite of the lofty and heroic strain which they breathe through- 
out. That narrative or legendary poetry still continued to be 
composed during the seventh and sixth centuries before the Chris- 
tian era is not to be questioned; but it exhibited the old epical 





1 See Quintilian, x. 1,63. Horat. Od. i. 32; ii. 13, Aristot. Polit. iii. 10, 
4. Dionys, Halic. observes (Vett. Scriptt. Censur. v. p. 421) respecting 
Alkxus — roAAayod yotv Td pérpov ef tig meptédot, pytopiKny av evpor 
moderetav; and Strabo (xiii. p. 617), Ta oraowriKad sips so tod ’AAKaiov 
TOUMaTa. 

There was a large dash of sarcasm and homely banter aimed at neighbors 
and contemporaries in the poetry of Sapphd, apart from her impassioned 
love-songs — GAAwe ox@mtet Tov Gypotkov viudiov Kat Tov Supwpdv Tov ey 
Toig yapotc, ebredéotara Kat év rélore dvouact paAdov 7 év motgriKoic. “QoTe 
avric paiNov éoTl Ta Tolpmpara TadTa dianéy. a8at } Gdew- v8’ Gv dpyooat 
mpd Tov XOpov H mpdc Tiv Adpay, el uh TIC sn xOpoc seetgeons | — 
Phaler, De Interpret. ec. 167). 

Compare also Herodot. ii. 135, who mentions the satirical talent of Sap- 
phé, employed against her brother for an extravagance about the courtezan 
Rhodo6pis. 

? Solon, Fragm. iv. }, ed. Schneidewin : — 

Avroc xnpvé nAvov ad’ iveptng Dadapivoc 
Kécpov éréwv Gdn avr’ dyopie Sépevoc, ete. 
See Brandis, Handbuch der Griechischen Philosophie, sect. xxiv.-xxv 
Plato states that Solén, in his old age, engaged in the composition of an 
epic poem, which he left unfinished, on the subject of the supposed island 
of Atlantis and Attica (Plato, Timmus, p. 21, and Kritias, p. 113). Plw 
tarch, Solén, ¢. 31. 





FORMATION OF AN HISTORICAL SENSE. 865 


wharacter without the old epical genius; both the inspiration cf 
the composer and the sympathies of the audience had become 
more deeply enlisted in the world before them, and disposed to 
fasten on incidents of their own actual experience. From Solin 
and Theognis we pass to the abandonment of all metrical restric 
tions and to the introduction of prose writing, —a fact, the im- 
portance of which it is needless to dwell upon, — marking as well 
the increased familiarity with written records, as the commence- 
ment of a separate branch of literature for the intellect, apart 
from the imagination and emotions wherein the old legends had 
their exclusive root. 

Egypt was first unreservedly opened to the Greeks during 
the reign of Psammetichus, about B. c. 660; gradually it became 
much frequented by them for military or commercial purposes, 
or for simple curiosity, and enlarged the range of their thoughts 
and observations, while it also imparted to them that vein of 
mysticism, which overgrew the primitive simplicity of the Ho- 
meric religion, and of which I have spoken in a former chapter 
hey found in it a long-established civilization, colossal wonders 
of architecture, and a certain knowledge of astronomy and geo- 
metry, elementary indeed, but in advance of their own. Moreover 
it was a portion of their present world, and it contributed to form 
in them an interest for noting and describing the actual realities 
before them. A sensible progress is made in the Greek mind 
during the two centuries from B. c. 700 to B. c. 500, in the re- 
cord and arrangement of historical facts: an historical sense arises 
in the superior intellects, and some idea of evidence as a discrim- 
inating test between fact and fiction. And this progressive ten- 
dency was further stimulated by increased communication and 
by more settled and peaceful social relations between the various 
members of the Hellenic world, to which may be added material 
improvements, purchased at the expense of a period of turbu- 
lence and revolution, in the internal administration of each sepa- 
rate state. The Olympic, Pythian, Nemean, and Isthmian games 
became frequented by visitors from the most distant parts of 
Greece : the great periodical festival in the island of Délos brought 
together the citizens of every Ionic community, with their wives 
and children, and an ample display of wealth and ornaments.! 





' Homer, Hymn. ad Apollin. 155 ; Thucydid. iii. 104. 


366 ISTORY OF GREECE. 


Numerous and flourishing colonies were founded in Sicily, the 
south of Italy, the coasts of Epirus and of the Euxine Sea: the 
Phokzans explored the whole of the Adriatic, established Mas« 
salia, and penetrated even as far as the south of Ibéria; with 
which they carried on a lucrative commerce.! |The geographical 
ideas of the Greeks were thus both expanded and rectified : the 
first preparation of a map, by Anaximander the disciple of Thalés, 
is an epoch in the history of science. We may note the ridicule 
bestowed by Herodotus both upon the supposed people called 
Hyperboreans and upon the idea of a cireumfluous ocean-stream, 
as demonstrating the progress of the age in this department of 
inquiry.2. And even earlier than Herodotus, Xanthus had no- 
ticed the occurrence of fossil marine productions in the interior 
of Asia Minor, which led him to reflections on the changes of the 
earth’s surface with respect to land and water.3 

If then we look down the three centuries and a half which 
elapsed between the commencement of the Olympic era and the 
age of Herodotus and Thucydidés, we shall discern a striking 
advance in the Greeks, — ethical, social and intellectual. Posi- 
tive history and chronology has not only been created, but in the 
case of Thucydidés, the qualities necessary to the historiographer, 
in their application to recent events, have been developed with 
a degree of perfection never since surpassed. Men’s minds have 
assumed a gentler as well as a juster cast; and acts come to be 
eriticized with reference to their bearing on the internal happi- 
ness of a well-regulated community, as well as upon the stand- 





1 Herodot. i. 163. 

? Herudot. iv. 36.. yeAd d2 dpéwv Ting weptidove ypawavrag mohdorg, ion, 
«al obdéva véov Exovrag éEnynoapuevov- ol ’Qeéavov re péovta ypadovar méptE 
hv yiv, todcav Kvkdotepéa O¢ ard Tépvonv, etc., a remark probably directed 
igainst Hekateeus. 

oko the map of Anaximander, Strabo, i. p. 7; Diogen. Laért. ii. 

t; Agathemer ap. Geograph. Minor. i. 1. parog éréAunoe tiv oixovpévgy 
a mivake ypapat. 

Aristagoras of Milétus, who visited Sparta to solicit aid for the revolted 
denians against Darius, brought with him a brazen tablet or map, by means 
of which he exhibited the relative position of places in the Persian empire 
'Herodot. v. 49). 

* Xanthus ap. Strabo. i. p. 50; xii. p. 579. Compare Creuzer, Fragmenta 
Aanihi, p. 162. 


a ae ee 


COMMENCEMENT OF PHYSICAL SCIENCE. 367 


ing harmony of fraternal states. While Thucydidés treats the 
habitual and licensed piracy, so coolly alluded to in the Homeric 
poems, as an obsolete enormity, many of the acts described in 
the old heroic and Theogonic legends were found not less repug- 
nant to this improved tone of feeling. The battles of the gods 
with the Giants and Titans,—the castration of Uranus by his 
son Kronus,—the cruelty, deceit and licentiousness, often sup- 
posed both in the gods and heroes, provoked strong disapproba- 
tion. And the language of the philosopher Xenophanés, who 
composed both elegiac and iambic poems for the express purpose 
of denouncing such tales, is as vehement and unsparing as that 
of the Christian writers, who, eight centuries afterwards, attack- 
ed the whole scheme of paganism.! 

Nor was it alone as an ethical and social critic that Xeno- 
phanés stood distinguished. He was one of a great and eminent 
triad — Thalés and Pythagoras being the others —— who, in the 
sixth century before the Christian xra, first opened up those 
veins of speculative philosophy which occupied afterwards so 


large a portion of Grecian intellectual energy. Of the material 


differences between the three I do not here speak ; I regard them 
only in reference to the Homeric and Hesiodic philosophy which 
preceded them, and from which all three deviated by a step, 
perhaps the most remarkable in all the history of philosophy. 
In the scheme of ideas common to Homer and to the Hesiodic 
Theogony (as has been already stated), we find nature distribut- 
ed into a variety of personal agencies, administered according to 
the free-will of different Beings more or less analogous to man 
—each of these Beings having his own character, attributes and 
powers, his own sources of pain and pleasure, and his own espe- 
cial sympathies or antipathies with human individuals ; each being 
determined to act or forbear, to grant favor or inflict injury in 
his own department of phznomena, according as men, or perhaps 
other Beings analogous to himself, might conciliate or offend him. 
The Gods, properly so called, (those who bore a proper name 
and received some public or family worship,) were the most com- 
manding and capital members amidst this vast network of agents 





1 Xenophan. ap. Sext. Empiric. adv. Mathemat. ix.193 Fragm. 1. Poet. 
Gree. ed. Schneidewin. Diogen. Laért. ix. 18. 


368 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


visible and invisible, spread over the universe. The whole view 
of nature was purely religious and subjective, the spontaneous 
suggestion of the early mind. It proceeded from the instinctive 
tendencies of the feelings and imagination to transport, to the 
world without, the familiar type of free-will and conscious per- 
sonal action: above all, it took deep hold of the emotions, from 
the widely extended sympathy which it so perpetually called 
forth between man and nature.2 

The first attempt to disenthral the philosophic intellect from 
this all-personifying religious faith, and to constitute a method of 
interpreting nature distinct from the spontaneous inspirations of 
untaught minds, is to be found in Thalés, Xenophanés and Pytha- 
goras, in the sixth century before the Christian «ra. It is in 
them that we first find the idea of Person tacitly set aside or 
limited, and an impersonal Nature conceived as the object of 
study. The divine husband and wife, Oceanus and ‘Téthys, 
parents of many gods and of the Oceanic nymphs, together with 
the avenging goddess Styx, are translated into the material sub- 
stance water, or, as we ought rather to say, the Fluid: and 
Thalés set himself to prove that water was the primitive element, 
out of which all the different natural substances had been formed.3 
He, as well as Xenophanés and Pythagoras, started the problem 
of physical philosophy, with its objective character and invariable 
laws, to be discoverable by a proper and methodical application 
of the human intellect. The Greek word Dvouc, denoting nature, 
and its derivatives physics and physiology, unknown in that large 
sense to Homer or Hesiod, as well as the word Kosmos, to denote 
the mundane system, first appears with these philosophers. The 





' Hesiod, Opp. Di. 122; Homer; Hymn. ad Vener. 260. 

2 A defence of the primitive faith, on this ground, is found in Plutarch, 
Question. Sympos. vii. 4, 4, p. 703. 

3 Aristotel. Metaphys. i. 3. 

4 Plutarch, Placit. Philos. ii. 1; also Stobseus, Eclog. Physic. i. 22, where 
the difference between the Homeric expressions and those of the subsequent 
philosophers is seen. Damm, Lexic. Homeric. vy. déor¢; Alexander von 
I{umboldt, Kosmos, p. 76, the note 9 on page 62 of that admirable work. 

The title of the treatises of the early philosophers (Melissus, Démokritus, 
Parmenidés, Empedoclés, Alkmz6n, etc.) was frequently Ilep? bicewe (Galen, 
Opp. tom. i. p. 56, ed. Basil). 


STUDY OF IMPERSONAL NATURE. 369 


elemental analysis of Thalés — the one unchangeable cosmic sub- 
stance, varying only in appearance, but not in reality, as suggest- 
ed by Xenophanés,—and the geometrical and arithmetical 
combinations of Pythagoras, —all these were different ways of 
approaching the explanation of physical phenomena, and each 
gave rise to a distinct school or succession of philosophers. But 
they all agreed in departing from the primitive method, and in 
recognizing determinate properties, invariable sequences, and 
objective truth, in nature —either independent of willing or 
designing agents, or serving to these latter at once as an indispen- 
sable subject-matter and as a limiting condition. Xenophanés 
disclaimed openly all knowledge respecting the gods, and pro- 
nounced that no man could have any means of ascertaining when 
he was right and when he was wrong, in affirmations respecting 
them :! while Pythagoras represents in part the scientific tenden- 
cies of his age, in part also the spirit of mysticism and of special 
fraternities for religious and ascetic observance, which became 
diffused throughout Greece in the sixth century before the Chris- 
tian era. This was another point which placed him in antipathy 
with the simple, unconscious and demonstrative faith of the old 
poets, as well as with the current legends. 

If these distinguished men, when they ceased to follow the 
primitive instinct of tracing the phenomena of nature to personal 
and designing agents, passed over, not at once to induction and 
observation, but to a misemployment of abstract words, substitut- 
ing metaphysical eidedla in the place of polytheism, and to an 
exaggerated application of certain narrow physical theories — we 
must remember that nothing else could be expected from the 
scanty stock of facts then accessible, and that the most profound 
study of the human mind points out such transition as an inevita- 
ble law of intellectual progress.? At present, we have to compare 





1 Xenophan. ap. Sext. Empiric. vii. 50; viii. 326. — 
Kat 76 piv obv cadic obtic aviip idev, obre tic éotiv 
Eidéc audi Sedv re kat dooa Aéyw rept TavTwv- 
Ei ydp kat ra wadora tixot TereAecpévov elrdy, 
Abto¢g bywc obk olde, déxoc 0 éx? wdéot TéTUKTEAL. 
Compare Aristotel. De Xenophane, Zenone, et Georgid, capp. 1-2. 
? See the treatise of M. Auguste Comte ( Cours de Philosophie Positive), and 


VOL. I. 16* 24oc. 


870 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


them only with that state of the Greek mind! which they partially 
superseded, and with which they were in decided opposition, The 
rudiments of physical science were conceived and developed 
among superior men; but the religious feeling of the mass was 
averse to them; and the aversion, though gradually mitigated, 
never wholly died away. Some of the philosophers were not 
backward in charging others with irreligion, while the multitude 
seems to have felt the same sentiment more or less towards all — 
or towards that postulate of constant sequences, with determinate 
conditions of occurrence, which scientific study implies, and which 
they could not reconcile with their belief in the agency of the 
gods, to whom they were constantly praying for special succor 
and blessings. 

The discrepancy between the scientific and the religious point 
of view was dealt with differently by different philosophers. ‘Thus 
Socratés openly admitted it, and assigned to each.a distinct and 
independent province. He distributed phenomena into two class- 
es: one, wherein the connection of antecedent and consequent was 
invariable and ascertainable by human study, and therefore fu- 
ture results accessible to a well-instructed foresight; the other, 
and those, too, the most comprehensive and important, which the 
gods had reserved for themselves and their own unconditional 
agency, wherein there was no invariable or ascertainable se- 
quence, and where the result could only be foreknown by some 
omen, prophecy, or other special inspired communication from 
themselves. Each of these classes was essentially distinct, and 
required to be looked at and dealt with in a manner radically in- 
compatible with the other. Socratés held it wrong to apply the 
scientific interpretation to the latter, or the theological interpre- 
tation to the former. Physics and astronomy, in his opinion, 





his doctrine of the three successive stages of the human mind in reference to 
scientific study — the theological, the metaphysical, and the positive; —a 
doctrine laid down generally in his first lecture (vol. i. p. 4-12), and largely 
applied and illustrated throughout his instructive work. It is also re-stated 
and elucidated by Mr. John Stuart Mill, in his System of Logic, Ratiocinative 
and Inductive, vol. ii. p. 610. 

? “Human wisdom (dv0pwxivy codia), as contrasted with the primitive 
theology (oi dpyaior kat diatpiBovree wep? Tac Yeodoyiac),” to take the words 
of Aristotle (Meteo~»log. ii. 1. pp. 41-42, ed. Tauchnitz). 


ear ee 





HIPPOCBATES. — ANAXAGORAS. 871i 


belonged to the divine class of phenomena, in which human re- 
search was insane, fruitless, and impious.! 

On the other hand, Hippocratés, the contemporary of Socratés, 
denied the discrepancy, and merged into one those two classes of 
phenomena, — the divine and the scientifically determinable, — 
which the latter had put asunder. Hippocratés treated all phe- 
nomena as at once both divine and scientifically determinable. 
In discussing certain peculiar bodily disorders found among the 
Scythians, he observes, “The Scythians themselves ascribe the 
cause of this to God, and reverence and bow down to such suf- 
ferers, each man fearing that he may suffer the like; and I my- 
self think too that these affections, as well as all others, are di- 
vine: no one among them is either more divine or more human 
than another, but all are on the same footing, and all divine; nev- 
ertheless each of them has its own physical conditions, and not 
one occurs without such physical conditions.”2 





-} Xenoph. Memor. i. 1,6-9. Ta wév dvayxaia (Lwxparne) cvveBoddAeve xat 
mpatrev, we évoulev dpior’ av xpaxdqvar> rept J Tov ddjAwy brw¢ dro- 
Bhooiro, pavtevoopévoug ExeuTer, ei moigtéa. Kat trove uédAovrac oixovg Te 
Kat méAet¢ Kae olkjcety pavTixn¢g Eon mpocdeiodat* TextoviKdy pév yap } 
YAAkevtixody 7 yeopytKdy f) dvOporwv apytkor, 7 THv ToLobTav Epywy éSerac- 
TLKOY, f) AoyioTtKdV, 7) OlxovoptKdy, ) OTpaTHytKdV yevéodal, TavTa Ta ToLATA, 
padipata kal dviparov yvoug aipetéa, tvouilev eivars Ta d2 wéytora Tov év 
rovroe on TODS Deode Eavtoic katadcinecVat, dv oddéiv diAov 
elvat toi¢ dvOparoic......... Tode dé pndév t&v TotobTwy olopévove elvat 
datpoviov, AAG ravta THe avipurivng yvounc, dapovgv n+ Sacmovgv dz 
kal Tode pavrevonévoue & toi¢ dvdpdrore Edwxav of Feot wadoior diaxpivew. 
<tdesdaes "Edn 62 deiv, & piv paddévrac roveiv Edwxav of Geol, pavdavew~ d 
8% phy dja Tote GvOparore Eort, metpdoSar did wavrinne mapa TOV teav Tur 
Vaveoda: Todie Beode yap, ole dv Sow idéw, onpaiverv. Compare also 
Memorab. iv. 7. 7; and Cyropzd. i. 6, 3, 23-46. 

Physical and astronomical phenomena are classified by Socratés among 
the divine class, interdicted to human study (Memor. i. 1, 13): 7d Geta or 
darpévia as supposed to révPparera. Plato (Phileb.c. 16; Legg. x. p. 886- 
889; xii. p. 967) held the sun and stars to be gods, each animated with its 
special soul: he allowed astronomical investigation to the extent necessary 
for avoiding blasphemy respecting these beings —péxpe tod my BAacdnreiv 
mept abta (vii. 821). 

2 Hippocratés, De Aére, Locis et Aquis, c. 22 (p. 78, ed. Littré, sect. 106 
ed. Petersen): ‘Ete re mpd¢ tovréoioe edvotyiar yiyvovrat of mAeiotot és 
TxbGqor, kal yuvaxnia épyalovrat kat Ge al yuvaixec dvadéyovtai re duoiwc: 
cadedyrat re of ro.odros dvavdoteic. Ol piv ody émtydpior tiv aitinv mpoe 


$72 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


A third distinguished philosopher of the same day, Anaxagoras, 
allegorizing Zeus and the other personal gods, proclaimed the 
doctrine of one common pervading Mind, as having first estab- 
lished order and system in the mundane aggregate, which had 
once been in a state of chaos— and as still manifesting its unin- 
terrupted agency for wise and good purposes. ‘This general doe- 
trine obtained much admiration from Plato and Aristotle; but 
they at the same time remarked with surprise, that Anaxagoras 
never made any use at all of his own general doctrine for the ex- 
planation of the phenomena of nature,— that he looked for noth- 
ing but physical causes and connecting laws,! — so that in fact 
the spirit of his particular researches was not materially different 
from those of Demokritus or Leukippus, whatever might be the 
difference in their general theories. His investigations in meteor- 
ology and astronomy, treating the heavenly bodies as subjects for 
calculation, have been already noticed as offensive, not only to 
the general public of Greece, but even to Socratés himself among 
them: he was tried at Athens, and seems to have escaped con- 
demnation only by voluntary exile? 





Tudéact Se@ Kal oéBovtat TovTéove Tole avbporove Kai mpookvvéovat, dedor 
Koreg wept éwitéwv Exactor. *Epol 62 xal duréy Ooxéet radra ra raSea Geie 
elvat, Kal TaAAa ravTa, Kai oddév Erepov érépov Setétepov odd avOparivd 
tepov, dAAa mavta Veia* Exaotov J& Eyer gooey TGY ToLlovTéwv, Kal ovde> 
avev dbowog ylyverat. Kal rodto 7d midoc, di pol doxéer yiyveodat, dpiow, 
etc. 

Again, sect. 112. ’AAAd yap, Gorep Kal mpérepov EAefa, Vela piv Kal 
TadTé gore bpuoiwe Toiot GAAoLoL, yiyverat 62 Kata dbow Exacta. 

Compare the remarkable treatise of Hippocratés, De Morbo Sacro, capp 
| and 18, vol. vi. p. 352-394, ed. Littré. See this opinion of Hippocratés 
illustrated by the doctrines of some physical philosophers stated in Aristotle, 
Physic. ii. 8. Gomep tet 6 Zede, ody brwe tov cirov abfjoy, GAN && dvéykne, 
ete. Some valuable observations on the method of Hippocratés are alse 
found in Plato, Phedr. p. 270. 

1 See the graphic picture in Plato, Pheedon. p. 97-98 (cap. 46-47): com- 
pare Plato, Legg. xii. p. 967; Aristotel. Metaphysic. i. p. 13-14 (ed. Bran- 
dis) ; Plutarch, Defect. Oraeal. p. 485. 

Simplicius, Commentar. in Aristotel. Physic. p. 38. xa? Smep 62 6 év Sai- 
Owvt Loxparye éyadci TH ’Avasayépa, Td ev rai¢ TOY Kara Hépas airtodoyiate 
22 TO vO Kexphodat, GAA raic bAtkaic drodécecty, oixeioy Hv TH pvovoroyia. 
Anaxagoras thought that the superior intelligence of men, as compared with 
other animals, arose from his possession of hands (Aristot. de Part. Animal. 
iv. 10. p. 687, ed. Bekk.). 

3 Xenophén, Memorab. iv. 7. Socratés said, xa? napappovnoa tov raira 








GRECIAN RELIGIOUS BELIFP 873 


- The three eminent men just named, all essentially different 
from each other, may be taken as illustrations of the philosophical 
mind of Greece during the last half of the fifth century B. o. 
Scientific pursuits had acquired a powerful hold, and adjusted 
themselves in various ways with the prevalent religious feelings 
of the age. Both Hippocratés and Anaxagoras modified their 
ideas of the divine agency so as to suit their thirst for scientific 
sesearch. According to the former, the gods were the really ef- 
ficient agents in the production of all phenomena, —the mean 
and indifferent not less than the terrific or tutelary. Being thus 
alike connected with all phenomena, they were specially asso- 
ciated with none — and the proper task of the inquirer was, to find 
out those rules and conditions by which (he assumed) their agency 
was always determined, and according to which it might be fore- 
told. And this led naturally to the proceeding which Plato and 
Aristotle remark in Anaxagoras, —that the all-governing and 
Infinite Mind, having been announced in sublime language at 
the beginning of his treatise, was afterward left out of sight, and 
never applied to the explanation of particular phanomena, be- 
ing as much consistent with one modification of nature as with 





MepiuvavTa ovdév Hrrov } "Avasayépac rwapedpovycev, 6 péytotov dpovacag 
ént TO Tae TGv Gedy unyavac éEnyeioSat, etc. Compare Schaubach, Anax- 
agorz Fragment. p. 50-141; Plutarch, Nikias, 23, and Periklés, 6-32; Dio 
gen. Laért. ii. 10-14. 

The Ionic philosophy, from which Anaxagoras receded more in language 
than in spirit, seems to have been the least popular of all the schools, though 
some of the commentators treat it as conformable to vulgar opinion, because 
it confined itself for the most part to phenomenal explanations, and did not 
recognize the noumena of Plato, or the ro év voyrév of Parmenidés, — “ qualis 
fuit Ionicorum, quz tum dominabatur, ratio, vulgari opinione ef communi 
sensu comprobata” (Karsten, Parmenidis Fragment., De Parmenidis Philo- 
sophia, p. 154). This is a mistake: the Ionic philosophers, who constantly 
searched for and insisted upon physical laws, came more directly into conflict 
with the sentiment of the multitude than the Eleatic school. 

The larger atmospheric phenomena were connected in the most intimate 
manner with Grecian religious feeling and uneasiness (see Demokritus ap, 
Sect. Empiric. ix. sect. 19-24. p. 552-554, Fabric.): the attempts of Anax- 
agoras and Demokritus to explain them were more displeasing to the publie 
than the Platonic speculations (Demokri‘us ap. Aristot. Meteorol. ii 7; 
Siobeus, Eclog. Physic, p. 594: compare Mullach, Democriti Fragments, 
lib. iv. j». 394). 


374 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


another. Now such a view of the divine agency could never be 
reconciled with the religious feelings of the ordinary Grecian 
believer, even as they stood in the time of Anaxagoras; still 
less could it have been reconciled with those of the Homeric 
man, more than three centuries earlier. By him Zeus and 
Athéné were conceived as definite Persons, objects of special 
reverence, hopes, and fears, and animated with peculiar feelings, 
sometimes of favor, sometimes of wrath, towards himself or his 
family or country. They were propitiated by his prayers, and 
prevailed upon to lend him succor in danger — but offended and 
disposed to bring evil upon him if he omitted to render thanks 
or sacrifice. This sense of individual communion with, and de- 
pendence upon them was the essence of his faith; and with that 
faith, the all-pervading Mind proclaimed. by Anaxagoras — 
which had no more concern with one man or one phenomenon 
than with another, — could never be brought into harmony. Nor 
could the believer, while he prayed with sincerity for special 
blessings or protection from the gods, acquiesce in the doctrine 
of Hippocratés, that their agency was governed by constant laws 
and physical conditions. 

That radical discord between the mental impulses of science 
and religion, which manifests itself so decisively during the 
most cultivated ages of Greece, and which harassed more or 
less so many of the philosophers, produced its most afflicting re- 
sult in the condemnation of Socratés by the Athenians. Accord- 
ing to the remarkable passage recently cited from Xenophén, it 
will appear that Socratés agreed with his countrymen in denoune- 
ing physical speculations as impious, — that he recognized the re- 
ligious process of discovery as a peculiar branch, coérdinate with 
the scientific, — and that he laid down a theory, of which the ba- 
sis was, the confessed divergence of these two processes from the 
beginning — thereby seemingly satisfying the exigencies of re- 
ligious hopes and fears on the one hand, and those of reason, in 
her ardor for ascertaining the invariable laws of phznomena, on 
the other. We may remark that the theory of this religious and 
extra-scientific process of discovery was at that time sufficiently 
complete; for Socratés could point out, thatthose anomalous phz- 
nomena which the gods had reserved for themselves, and inte 


SOCKATES AND THE ATHENIANS. 375 


which science was forbidden to pry, were yet. accessible to the 
seekings of the pious man, through oracles, omens, and other excep- 
tional means of communication which divine benevolence vouch- 
safed to keep open. Considering thus to how great an extent 
Socratés was identified in feeling with the religious public of 
Athens, and considering moreover that his performance of open 
religious duties was assiduous — we might wonder, as Xenophén 
does wonder,! how it could have happened that the Athenian di- 
kasts mistook him at the end of his life for an irreligious man. 
But we see, by the defence which Xenophén as well as Plato 
gives for him, that the Athenian public really considered him, in 
spite of his own disclaimer, as homogeneous with Anaxagoras 
_ and the other physical inquirers, because he had applied similar 
scientific reasonings to moral and social phenomena. They look- 
ed upon him with the same displeasure as he himself felt towards 
the physical philosophers, and we cannot but admit that in this 
respect they were more unfortunately consistent than he was. It 
is true that the mode of defence adopted by Socratés contributed 
much to the verdict found against him, and that he was further 
weighed down by private offence given to powerful individuals 
and professions ; but all these separate antipathies found their best 
account in swelling the cry against him as an over-curious scep- 
tic, and an impious innovator. 

Now the scission thus produced between the superior minds 
and the multitude, in consequence of the development of science 
and the scientific point of view, is a fact of great moment in the 
history of Greek progress, and forms an important contrast be- 
tween the age of Homer and Hesiod and that of Thucydidés ; 
though in point of fact even the multitude, during this later age, 
were partially modified by those very scientific views which they 
regarded with disfavor. And we must keep in view the prim- 
itive religious faith, once universal and unobstructed, but subse- 
quently disturbed by the intrusions of science; we must follow 
the great change, as well in respect to enlarged intelligence as 
to refinement of social and ethical feeling, among the Greeks, 
from the Hesiodie times downward, in order to render some ac- 
count of the altered manner in which the ancient mythes came 





! Xenophén, Memorab. i. 1 


376 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


to be dealt with. These mythes, the spontaneous 
creative and personifying interpretation of nature,» 
root in Grecian associations at a time when the national faith 
required no support from what we call evidence. . They were 
now submitted, not simply to a feeling, imagining, and believing 
phers, historians, ethical teachers, and critics, — and to a public 
partially modified by their ideas' as well as improved by a wider 
dience ; they had ceased to be in complete harmony even with the 
lower strata of intellect and sentiment, — much more so with the 
higher. But they were the cherished inheritance of a past time; 
they were interwoven in a thousand ways with the religious faith, 
the patriotic retrospect, and the national worship, of every Gre- 
cian community ; the general type of the mythe was the ancient, 
familiar, and universal form of Grecian thought, which even the 
poets,? and by which they were to a certain degree unconsciously 


‘ It is curious to see that some of the most recondite doctrines of the Py 
thagorean philosophy were actually brought before the general Syracusan 
public in the comedies of Epicharmus: “In comeediis suis personas swepe ita 
colloqui fecit, ut sententias Pythagoricas et inuniversum sublimia vite pre- 
cepta immisceret” (Grysar, De Doriensiam Comeedii, p. 111, Col 1828). 
The fragments preserved in Diogen. Laért. (iii. 9-17) present both criticisms 
upon the Hesiodic doctrine of a primeval chaos, and an exposition of the 
archetypel and immutable ideas (as opposed to the fluctuating phenomena 
of sense) which Plato afterwards adopted and systematized. 

Epicharmus seems to have combined with this abstruse philosophy & 
strong vein of comic shrewdness and some turn to scepticism (Cicero, Epis- 
tol ad Attic. i. 19): “ut crebro mihi vafer ille Siculus Epicharmus insusurret 
cantilenam suam.” Clemens Alex. Strom. v. p. 258. Nage nal aépmac’ éxt- 
oteiv- dpOpa tabra tiv dpevav. Zouev dprdus nai AoyiopD> ratra yop caret 
Sporete. Also his contemptuous ridicule of the prophetesses of his time 
who cheated foolish women out of their money, pretending to universal 
knowieigs, set serre jryeceusvn: 79 Fever A6yp (sp Pollut: be SEE See, 
about Epicharmus, O. Maller, Dorians, iv. 7, 4. ‘ry ofty 

* ‘These dramas seem to have been exhibited at Syracuse between 480-460 
B.C., anterior even to Chionidés and Magnés at Athens (Aristou 
he says 50426 mpétepoc, which can hardly be literally exact. The cr 
the Horatiamage looked upon Epicharmus as the prototype of Plantus 
Epistol. ii. 1. 53). 
* The third book of the republic of Plato is particularly striking in refer. 


an 











POETS AND LOGOGRAPHERS. 377 


enslaved. ‘taken as a whole the mythes aad acquired prescripx 
tive and ineffaceable possession: to attack, call in question, or 
repudiate them, was a task painful even to undertake, and far 
beyond the power of any one to accomplish. 

: For these reasons the anti-mythic vein of criticism was of 
no effect as a destroying force, but nevertheless its dissolving de- 
composing and transforming influence was very considerable. To 
accommodate the ancient mythes to an improved tone of sentiment 
and a newly created canon of credibility, was a function which 
even the wisest Greeks did not disdain, and which occupied no 
small proportion of the whole intellectual activity of the nation. 
_. The mythes were looked at from a point of view completely 
foreign to the reverential curiosity and literal imaginative faith 
of the Homeric man; they were broken up and recast in order 
to force them into new moulds such as their authors had never 
conceived. We may distinguish four distinct classes of minds, 
in the literary age now under examination, as having taken them 
-in hand—the poets, the logographers, the philosophers, and the 
historians. 

With the poets and logographers, the mythical persons are real 
predecessors, and the mythical world an antecedent fact; but it 
is divine and heroic reality, not human; the present is only half- 
brother of the past (to borrow! an illustration from Pindar in his 
allusion to gods and men), remotely and generically, but not 
closely and specifically, analogous to it. As a general habit, the 
old feelings and the old unconscious faith, apart from all proof or 
evidence, still remain in their minds; but recent feelings have 
grown up which compel them to omit, to alter, sometimes even to 
reject and condemn, particular narratives. — 

Pindar repudiates some stories and transforms others, because 
they are inconsistent with his conceptions of the gods. ‘Thus he 
formally protests against the tale that Pelops had been killed 
and served up at table by his father, for the immortal gods to eat; 
he: cagininteees the sden eh ieepating to them:20 horrid. am aype> 





ence to the use of the poets in education : see also his treatise De Legg. vii. 
p- 810-811. Some teachers made their pupils learn whole pocts by heart 
(Aove roinrac éxuaySaver}, others preferred extracts and selections. 

! Pindar, Nem. vi. 1. Compare Simonidés, Fragm. 1 (Gaisford). 


378 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


tite; he pronountes the tale to have been originally fabricated 
by a slanderous neighbor. Nor can he bring himself to recount 
the quarrels between different gods.! The amours of Zeus and 
Apollo are no way displeasing to him; but he occasionally sup- 
presses some of the simple details of the old mythe, as deficient 
in dignity: thus, according to the Hesiodic narrative, Apollo was 
informed by a raven of the infidelity of the nymph Korénis: but 
the mention of the raven did not appear to Pindar consistent 
with the majesty of the god, and he therefore wraps up the mode 
of detection in vague and mysterious language.2 He feels con- 
siderable repugnance to the character of Odysseus, and intimates 
* more than once that Homer has unduly exalted him, by force of 
poetical artifice. With the character of the Auakid Ajax, on the 
other hand, he has the deepest sympathy, as well as with his 
untimely and inglorious death, occasioned by the undeserved pre- 
ference of a less worthy rival. He appeals for his authority usu- 
ally to the Muse, but sometimes’ to “ancient sayings of men,” 
accompanied with a general allusion to story-tellers and bards, — 
admitting, however, that these stories present great discrepancy, 
and sometimes that they are false Yet the marvellous and 
the supernatural afford no ground whatever for rejecting a 
story: Pindar makes an express declaration to this effect in re- 
ference to the romantic’ adventures of Perseus and the Gorgon’s 
head. He treats even those mythical characters, which con- 
flict the most palpably with positive experience, as connected 
by a real genealogical thread with the world before him. Not 
merely the heroes of Troy and Thébes, and the demigod seamen 
of Jasén and the ship Argé, but also the Centaur Cheirén, ‘the 
hundred-headed Typhdés, the giant oe Anteeus, Bellero- 





' Pindar, Olymp. i: 30-55; ix.  B245. 

? Pyth. iii. 25. See the allusions to Semelé, Alkména, and Danaé, Pyth. 
iii. 98; Nem. x. 10. Compare also supra, chap. ix. P. 245. 

. Pindar. Nem. vii. 20-30; viii. 23-31. Isthm. iii. 50-60. 

It seems to be sympathy for Ajax, in odes addressed to noble Mencia 
victors, which induces him thus to depreciate Odysseus ; for he eulogizes Sisy- 
phus, specially on account of his cunning and resources (Olymp. xiii. 50) 
in the ode addressed to Xenophon the Corinthian. 

4 Olymp. i..28 ; Nem. viii. 20; Pyth. i. 93; Olymp. vii. 55; Nem. vi. 43 
eavri 3” Gebachiey mahatat Tita ete. 

* Pyth. x. 49. Compare Pyth. xii. 11-22, 


TRAGIC POETS 379 


phon and Pegasus, the Chimera, the Amazons and the Hyper- 
boreans — all appear painted on the same canvas, and touched 
with the same colors, as the men of the recent and recorded past, 
Phalaris and Kreesus ; only they are thrown back to a greater 
distance in the perspective.! The heroic ancestors of those great 
ZEginetan, Thessalian, Théban, Argean, etc. families, whose pre- 
sent members the poet celebrates for their agonistic victories, 
sympathize with the exploits and second the efforts of their de- 
scendants: the inestimable value of a privileged breed and of 
the stamp of nature is powerfully contrasted with the impotence 
of unassisted teaching and practice.2 The power and skill of 
the Argeian Thexus and his relatives as wrestlers, are ascribed — 
partly to the fact that their ancestors Pamphaés in aforetime 
had hospitably entertained the Tyndarids Kastor and Pollux3 
Perhaps however the strongest. proof of the sincerity of Pindar’s 
mythical faith is afforded when he notices a guilty incident with 
shame and repugnance, but with an unwilling confession of its 
truth, as in the case of the fratricide committed on Phokus by 
his brothers Péleus and Telamén.4 

ZEschylus and Sophoklés exhibit the same spontaneous and 
uninquiring faith as Pindar in the legendary antiquities of Greece, 
taken as a whole; but they allow themselves greater license as 
to the details. It was indispensable to the success of their com- 
positions that they should recast and group anew the legendary 
events, preserving the names and general understood relation of 
those characters whom they introduced. The demand for novelty 
of combination increased with the multiplication of tragic specta- 
cles at Athens: moreover the feelings of the Athenians, ethical 
as well as political, had become too critical to tolerate the literal 
reproduction of many among the ancient stories. 

Both of them exalted rather than lowered the dignity of the 
mythical world, as something divine and heroic rather than human. 





1 Pyth. i, 17; iii. 4-7; iv. 12; viii. 16. Nem. iv. 27-32; v. 89. Isthm:v. 
31; vi. 44-48. Olymp. iii. 175 viii. 63; xiii. 61-87. 

2 Nem. iii. 39; v.40. ovyyevig ebdokia—nérpoc ovyyeric ; v. 8. Olymp. 
ix. 103. Pindar seems to introduce ¢@é@ in cases where Homer would have 
mentioned the divine assistance. 

3 Nem. x. 37-51. Compare the family legend of t the Athenian Déme 
crates, in Plato, Lysis, p. 295. 4 Nem. vy. 12-16. 


386 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


The Prométheus of Aschylus is a far more exalted conception 
than his keen-witted namesake in Hesiod, and the more homely 
details of the ancient Thébais and C&dipodia were in like manner 
modified by Sophoklés.!. The religious agencies of the old epic 
are constantly kept prominent, and the paternal curse, —the 
wrath of deceased persons against those from whom they have 
sustained wrong,—the judgments of the Erinnys against guilty 
or foredoomed persons, sometimes inflicted directly, sometimes 
brought about through dementation of the sufferer himself (like 
the Homeric Até),—are frequent in their tragedies.2 





' 1 See above, chap. xiv. p. 368. on the Legend of the Siege of Thébes. 

? The curse of C&dipus is the determining force in the Sept. ad Théb., 
Apa 7’, "Epivyde matpoe 7 weyaod_evhg (v. 70); it reappears several times in 
the course of the drama, with particular solemnity in the mouth of Eteoklés 
(695-709, 725, 785, etc. ); he yields to it as an irresistible force, as carrying 
the family to ruin: — 

Ere? rd xpdypa Kapr’ érorépyet Vede, 
"Irw Kaz’ odpov, Kiva Koxvrod Aayor, 
boiBw orvyn div rév rd Aatov yévoc. 

* * * * * 
Gidov yap éySpa ot rarpdc réAer dpa 
Enpoic axAaborore dupaciy mpoorlavet, etc. 


So again at the opening of the Agamemn6n, the prayer pivig Texvorowog 
(v. 155) and the sacrifice of Iphigeneia are dwelt upon as leaving behind 
them an avenging doom upon Agamemnon, though he took precautions for 
gagging her mouth during the sacrifice and thus preventing her from giving 
utterance to imprecations— ®%6yyov dpaioy oikow Big yadivdv 7’ dvaid@ 
uévet (katacyxeiv), v.346. The Erinnys awaits Agamemnon even at the 
moment of his victorious consummation at Troy (467; compare 762-990, 
1336-1433): she is most to be dreaded after great good fortune: she enforces 
the curse which ancestral crimes have brought upon the house of Atreus— 
mparapyos &ty — radaal duapriac déuwy (1185-1197, Choéph. 692) —the 
curse imprecated by the outraged Thyestés (1601). In the Choéphore, 
Apollo menaces Orestés with the wrath of his deceased father, and all the 
direful visitations of the Erinnyes, unless he undertakes to revenge the mur- 
der (271-296), Alcoa and ’Epevvd¢ bring on blood for blood (647). But the 
moment that Orestés, placed between these conflicting obligations (925), has 
achieved it, he becomes himself the victim of the Erinnyes, who drive him 
mad even at the end of the Choéphorm (éw¢ 0’ ér’ Eudpwr elp?, 1026), and 
who make their appearance bodily, and pursue him throughout the third 
drama of this fearful trilogy. The Eidélon of Klytemnéstra impels them to 
vengeance (Kumenid. 96) and even spurs them on when they appear to relax, 


ASCHYLUS. $81 


ZEschylus in two of his remaining pieces brings forward the 
gods as the chief personages, and far from sharing the objection 
of Pindar to dwell upon dissensions of the gods, he introduces 
Prométheus and Zeus in the one, Apollo and the Eumenidés in 
the other, in marked opposition. The dialogue, first superinduced 
by him upon the primitive Chorus, gradually became the most 
important portion of the drama, and is more elaborated in Sopho- 
klés than in Aschylus. Even in Sophoklés, however, it still 
generally retains its ideal majesty as contrasted with the rhetori- 
cal and forensic tone which afterwards crept in; it grows out of 
the piece, and addresses itself to the emotions more than to the 
reason of the audience. Nevertheless, the effect of Athenian 
political discussion and democratical feeling is visible in both these 
dramatists. The idea of rights and legitimate privileges as op- 
posed to usurping force, is applied by Auschylus even to the so- 
ciety of the gods: the Eumenidés accuse Apollo of having, with the 
insolence of youthful ambition, “ ridden down” their old preroga-: 





Apollo conyeys Orestés to Athens, whither the Erinnyes pursue him, and 
prosecute him before the judgment-seat of the goddess Athéné, to whom 
they submit the award; Apollo appearing as his defender. The debate 
between “the daughters of Night” and the god, accusing and defending, is 
eminently curious (576-730) : the Erinnyes are deeply mortified at the humil- 
iation put upon them when Orestés is acquitted, but Athéné at length recon- 
ciles them, and a covenant is made whereby they become protectresses of 
Attica, accepting of a permanent abode and solemn worship (1006): Orestés 
returns to Argos; and promises that evenin his tomb he will watch that none 
of his descendants shall ever injure the land of Attica (770). The solemn trial 
and acquittal of Orestés formed the consecrating legend of the Hill and Judi 
cature of Areiopagus. 

This is the only complete triology of Aischylus which we possess, and the 
avenging Erinnyes (416) are the movers throughout the whole — unseen in 
the first two dramas, visible and appalling in the third. And the appearance 
of Cassandra under the actual prophetic fever in the first, contributes still 
farther to impart to it a coloring different from common humanity. 

The general view of the movement of the Oresteia given in Welcker 
(Zschyl. Trilogie, p. 445) appears to me more conformable to Hellenie 
ideas than that of Klausen (Theologumena Aéschyli, pp. 157-169), whose 
valuable collection and comparison of passages is too much affected, both 
here and elsewhere, by the desire to bring the agencies of the Greek mythical 
world into harmony with what a religious mind of the present day would 
approve. Moreover, he sinks the personality of Athéné too much in the 
supreme authority of Zeus (p. -58-168). 


382 HISTORY OF GRELCE. 


tives! — while the Titan Prométheus, the champion of suffering 
humanity against the unfriendly dispositions of Zeus, ventures te 
depict the latter as a recent usurper reigning only by his superior 
strength, exalted by one successful revolution, and destined at 
some future time to be overthrown by another, —a fate which 
cannot be averted except through warnings communicable only 
by Prométheus himself.2 
It is commonly understood that Auschylus disapproved of the 
march of democracy at Athens during his later years, and that 
the Eumenidés is intended as an indirect manifestation in favor 
of the senate of Areiopagus. Without inquiring at present whether 
such a special purpose can be distinctly made out, we may plain- 
ly see that the poet introduces, into the relations of the gods with 
each other, a feeling of political justice, arising out of the times 
in which he lived and the debates of which he was a witness. 
But though ZEschylus incurred reproaches of impiety from Plato, 
and seemingly also from the Athenian public, for particular speech- 
es and incidents in his tragedies,3 and though he does not adhere 





1 Eumenidés, 150.— 
Id mat Ade, éxixdoroc wéX et, 
Nog d? ypaiag daivovac kadinracw, ete. 
‘The same metaphor again, v. 731. Aschylus seems to delight in contrast 
ing the young and the old gods: compare 70-162, 882. 

The Erinnyes tell Apollo that he assumes functions which do not belong 
to him, and will thus desecrate those which do belong to him (715-754) :— 
"AAN aiuarnpa mpayuar’, ob Aax a», céBetc, 

Mavreia & obk 9 dyvd pavteboet pévov. 

The refusal of the king Pelasgos, in the Supplices, to undertake what he 
feels to be the sacred duty of protecting the suppliant Danatdes, without first 
submitting the matter to his people and obtaining their expressed consent, and 
the fear which he expresses of their blame (kar’ dpxac¢ yap gAairiog Aéwe), are 
more forcibly set forth than an old. epic poet would probably have thought ne- 
cessary (see Supplices, 369, 397, 485, 519). The solemn wish to exclude both 
anarchy and despotism from Athens bears still more the mark of political 
fecling of the time — pfr’ dvapyov pate deororoupévov (Eumenid. 527-696) 

2 Prométheus, 35, 151, 170, 309, 524, 910, 940, 956. 

3 Plato, Republ. ii. 381-383; compare Aischyl. Fragment. 159, ed. Din 
dorf. . He was charged also with having divulged in some of his plays secret 
matters of the mysteries of Démétér, but is said to have excused himself by 
alleging ignorance: he was not aware that what he had said was comprised 


i Bll cel 








Z/SCHYLUS. 383 


to the receiveil vein of religious tradition with the same strictness 
as Sophoklés — yet the ascendency and interference of the gods 
is never out of sight, and the solemnity with which they are 
represented, set off by a bold, figurative, and elliptical styleeof 





in the mysteries (Aristot. Ethic. Nicom. iii, 2; Clemens Alex. Strom. ii, 
p. 387); the story is different again in ALlian, v. H. vy. 19. 

How little can be made out distinctly respecting this last accusation may 
be seen in Lobeck, Aglaopham. p. 81. 

Cicero (Tusc. Dis. ii. 10) calls Adschylus “ almost a Pythagorean :” upon 
what the epithet is founded we do not know. 

There is no. evidence to prove to us that the Prométheus Vinctus was 
considered as impious by the public before whom it was represented; but its 
obvious meaning has been so regarded by modern critics, who resort to many 
different explanations of it, in order to prove that when properly construed 
it is not impious, But if we wish to ascertain what Aschylus really meant, 
we ought not to consult the religious ideas of modern times; we have no 
tast except what we know of the poet’s own time and that which had _pre- 
ceded him. The explanations given by the ablest critics seem generally to 
exhibit a predetermination to bring out, Zeus as a just, wise, merciful, and 
all-powerful Being ; and all, in one way or another, distort the figures, alter 
the perspective; and give far-fetched interpretations of the meaning, of this 
striking drama, which conveys an impression directly contrary (see Welck- 
er, Trilogie, ZEsch. p. 90-117, with the explanation of Dissen there given; 
Klausen, Theologum. Aésch. p. 140-154; Schémann, in his recent transla- 
tion of the play, and the criticism on that translation in the Wiener Jahr- 
bucher, vol. cix. 1845, p. 245, by F. Ritter). On the other hand, Schutz 
(Excurs, ad Prom. Vinct. p. 149) thinks that Auschylus wished by means of 
this drama to enforce upon his countrymen the hatred of a despot. Though 
I do not agree in this interpretation, it appears to me less wide of the truth 
than the forcible methods employed by others to bring the poet into har- 
mony with their own religious ideas. 

Without presuming to determine whether Aischylus proposed to himself. 
any special purpose, if we look at the Auschylean Prométheus in reference 
only. to ancient ideas, it will be found to borrow both its characters and all 
its main circumstances from the legend in the Hesiodic Theogony.. Zeus 
acquires his supremacy only by overthrowing Kronos and the Titans. the 
Titan god Prométheus is the pronounced champion of helpless man, and 
negotiates with Zeus on their behalf: Zeus wishes to withhold from them 
the most essential blessings, which Prométheus employs deceit and theft to 
procure for them, and ultimately with success; undergoing, however, severe 
punishment for so doing from the superior force of Zeus. These are the 
main features of the A’schylean Prométheus, and they are all derived from 
the legend as it stands in the Theogony. As for the human race, they are 
depicted as abject and helpless in an extreme degree, in Alschylus even 


384 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


expression (otten but imperfectly intelligible to modern readers), 
reaches its maximum in his tragedies. As he throws pire ” 





more than in Hesiod: they appear as a race of aboriginal savages, having 
the god Prométheus for their protector. 

ZEschylus has worked up the old legend, homely and unimpressive as we 
read it in Hesiod, into a. sublime ideal. We are not to forget that Promé- 
theus is not a man, but a god, — the equal of Zeus in race, though his infe- 
rior in power, and belonging to a family of gods who were once superior to 
Zeus: he has moreover deserted his own kindred, and lent all his aid and 
superior sagacity to Zeus, whereby chiefly the latter was able to acquire 
supremacy (this /ast circumstance is an addition by ASschylus himself to the 
Hesiodic legend). In spite of such essential service, Zeus had doomed him 
to cruel punishment, for no other reason than because he conferred upon 
helpless man the prime means of continuance and improvement, thus thwart- 
ing the intention of Zeus to extinguish the race. 

Now Zeus, though superior to all the other gods and exercising general 
control, was never considered, either in Grecian legend or in Grecian religious 
belief, to be superior in so immeasurable a degree as to supersede all free 
action and sentiment on the part of gods less powerful. There were many 
old legends of dissension among the gods, and several of disobedience against 
Zeus: when a poet chose to dramatize one of these, he might so turn his 
composition as to sympathize either with Zeus or with the inferior god, with- 
out in either case shocking the general religious feeling of the country. And 
if there ever was an instance in which preference of the inferior god would 
be admissible, it is that of Prométheus, whose proceedings are such as to call 
forth the maximum of human sympathy, —superior intelligence pitted against 
superior force, and resolutely encountering foreknown suffering, for the sole 
purpose of rendering inestimable and gratuitous service to mortals. 

Of the Prométheus Solutus, which formed a sequel to the Prométhens 
Vinctus (the entire trilogy is not certainly known), the fragments preserved 
are very scanty, and the guesses of critics as to its plot have little base to 
proceed upon. They contend that, in one way or other, the apparent objec- 
tions which the Prométh. Vinctus presents against the justice of Zeus were 
in the Prométh. Solutus removed. Hermann, in his Dissertatio de Zschyli 
. Prometheo Soluto (Opuscula, vol. iv. p. 256), calls this position in question : 
I transcribe from his Dissertation one passage, because it contains an im- 
portant remark in reference to the manner in which the Greek poets handled 
their religious legends: “ while they recounted and believed many enormi- 
ties respecting individual gods, they always described the Godhead in the 
abstract as holy and faultless.”......... 

“Immo illud admirari oportet, quod quum de singulis Diis indignissime 
quaque crederent, tamen ubi sine certo nomine Deum dicebant, immunen: 
ab omni vitio, summéque sanctitate preditum intelligebant. Iam igitur 
Jovis sxvitiam ut excusent defensores Trilogia, et jure pumtum volunt Pyo- 


SOF HOKuRS. 385 


gods a kind of airy grandeur, so neither do his men or neroes 
appear like tenants of the common earth: the mythical world 
from which he borrows his characters is peopled only with “ the 
immediate seed of the gods, in close contact with Zeus, in whom 
the divine blood has not yet had time to degenerate :”! his indi- 
viduals are taken, not from the iron race whom Hesiod acknow- 
ledges with shame as his contemporaries, but from the extinct 
heroic race which had fought at Troy and Thébes. It is to them 
that his conceptions aspire, and he is even chargeable with fre- 
quent straining, beyond the limits of poetical taste, to realize his 
picture. If he does not consistently succeed in it, the reason is 
because consistency in such a matter is unattainable, since, after 
all, the analogies of common humanity, tle only materials which 
the most creative imagination has to work upon, obtrude them- 
selves involuntarily, and the lineaments of the man are thus seen 
even under a dress which promises superhuman proportions. 
Sophoklés, the most illustrious ornament of Grecian tragedy, 
dwells upon the same heroic characters, and maintains their 
grandeur, on the whole, with little abatement, combining with it a 
far better dramatic structure, and a wider appeal to human sym- 
pathies. Even in Sophoklés, however, we find indications that 
an altered ethical feeling and a more predominant sense of artistic 
perfection are allowed to modify the harsher religious agencies of 
the old epic; occasional misplaced effusions? of rhetoric, as well 





metheum — et in sequente fabuld reconciliato Jove, restitutam arbitrantur 
divinam justitiam. Quo invento, vereor ne non optime dignitati consulue- 
rint supremi Deorum, quem decuerat potius non szvire omnino, quam pla- 
cari ed lege, ut alius Promethei vice lueret.” 

1 ZEschyl. Fragment. 146, Dindorf; ap. Plato. Repub. iii. p. 391; compare 
Strabo, xii. p. 580.— 

Hetweaelils cote hs of Gedy ayxioropot 
Oi Znvic éyyde, oi¢ év "Idaiy rayy 
Avd¢ ratpgov Bapoc or’ év aidépt, 
Kotro ogi éirndov aiva daipover. 

There is one real exception to this statement—the Perse: — which is 
founded upon an event of recent occurrence; and one apparent exception —- 
the Prométheus Vinctus. But in that drama no individual mortal is made 
to appear; we can hardly consider I6 as an é¢7uepoe (253). 

* For the characteristics of Auschylus see Aristophan. Ran. 755, ad fin, 
passim. The competition between Aischylus and Enuripidés turns upon yvd- 

VOL. f. 17 250c. 


386 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


as of didactic prolixity, may also be detected. It is Adschylus, 
not Sophoklés, who forms the marked antithesis to Euripidés; it 
is AXschylus, not Sophoklés, to whom Aristophanés awards the 
prize of tragedy, as the poet who assigns most. perfectly to the 
heroes of the past those weighty words, imposing equipments, 
simplicity of great deeds with little talk, and masculine energy 
superior to the corruptions of Aphrodité, which beseem the com- 
rades of Agamemnén and Adrastus.' 

How deeply this feeling, of the heroic character of the mythi- 
cal world, possessed the Athenian mind, may be judged by the 
bitter criticisms made on Euripidés, whose compositions were 
pervaded, partly by ideas of physical philosophy learnt under 
Anaxagoras, partly by the altered tone of education and the wide 
diffusion of practical eloquence, forensic as well as political, at 





pat ayadal, 1497; the weight and majesty of the words, 1362; mpdro¢ ray 
‘EAAnvev tupyooag pjuata ceuva, 1001, 921, 930 (“sublimis et gravis et 
grandiloquus szepe usque ad vitium,” Quintil. x. 1); the imposing appearance 
of his heroes, such as Memnon and Cycnus, 961; their reserve in speech, 
908; his dramas “full of Arés” and his lion-hearted chiefs, inspiring the 
auditors with fearless spirit in Oe a of their country, — 1014, 1019, 1040; 
his contempt of feminine tenderness, 1042. — 

Fiscu. O20’ old’ oidete Hrvtiv’ Epdoav roror’ éxoinoa yuvaixa. 

Evrir. Ma Ai’, 0b62 yap hy rie A dpodirne obdév oot. 

ZEscu. pndé y érein’ 
"AAD? Ext cot Tor Kal Toi¢ Goloty TOMA TOAAOD *xixaIoLTO. 

To the same general purpose Nubes (1347-1356), composed so many years 
earlier. The weight and majesty of the Aischylean heroes (Sapo, Td ueyado- 
mperéc ) is dwelt upon in the life of Aschylus, and Sophoklés is said to have 
derided it—“Qorep yap 6 Lodoxdrye eAeye, tov AioybAov diarenaryor 
é6y« ov, ete. (Plutarch, De Profect. in Virt. Sent. c. 7), unless we areto un- 
derstand this as a mistake of Plutarch quoting Sophoklés instead of Euri- 
pidés, as he speaks in the Frogs of Aristophanés, which is the opinion both 
of Lessing in his Life of Sophoklés and of Welcker (Eschyl. Trilogie, p. 
525). 

1 See above, Chapters xiv. and xv. 

ZEschylus seems to have been a greater innovator as to the matter of the 
m7thes than either Sophoklés or Euripidés (Dionys, Halic. Judic.de Vett. 
Seript. p. 422, Reisk.). For the close adherence of Sophoklés to the Homeric 
epic, see Athens. vii. p. 277; Diogen. Laért, iv. 20; Suidas, v. MloAguov 
ZEschylus puts into the mouth of the Eumenidés a serious argument derived 
from the behavior of Zeus in chaining his father Kronos (Eumen, 642? 


ALTERED TONE OF EURIPIDES. 387 


Athens! While Aristophanés assails Euripidés as the represen- 
tative of this “young Athens,” with the utmost keenness of 
sarcasm, — other critics also concur in designating him as having 
vulgarized the mythical heroes, and transformed them into mere 
characters of common life, — loquacious, subtle, and savoring of 
the market-place.2 In some of his plays, sceptical expressions 
and sentiments were introduced, derived from his philosophical 
studies, sometimes confounding two or three distinct gods into one, 
sometimes translating the personal Zeus into a substantial ther 
with determinate attributes. He put into the mouths of some of 
his unprincipled dramatic characters, apologetic speeches which 
were denounced as ostentatious sophistry, and as setting out a 
triumphant case for the eriminal.3 His thoughts, his words, and 
the rhythm of his choric songs, were all accused of being deficient 
in dignity and elevation. The mean attire and miserable attitude 





1 See Valckenaer, Diatribe in Euripid. Fragm. capp. 5 and 6. 

The fourth and fifth lectures among the Dramatische Vorlesungen of August 
Wilhelm Schlegel depict both justly and eloquently the difference between 
Zschylus, Sophoklés and Euripidés, especially on this point of the gradual 
sinking of the mythical colossus into an ordinary man; about Euripidés 
especially in lecture 5, vol.i. p. 206, ed. Heidelberg 1809. 

2 Aristot. Poetic, c. 46. Olov cat LopoxdAne &n, abrd¢ pév olove det rovety 
Eipiridne 62, olot elot. 

The Ranw and Acharneis of Aristophanés exhibit fully the reproaches 
urged against Euripidés: the language put into the mouth of Euripidés 1 
the former play (vv. 935-977) illustrates specially the point here laid down. 
Plutarch (De Glorid Atheniens. c. 5) contrasts 7 Evpiridov cogia nat 7 
LogokAeov¢ Aoysoty¢. Sophoklés either adhered to the old mythes or intro 
duced alterations into them in a spirit comformable to their original charac- 
ter, while Euripidés refined upon them. The comment of Démétrius Phale- 
reus connects Td Adycov expressly with the maintenance of the dignity of the 
tales. “Apfowa: 6 Gxd Tov peyadonperoic, Srep viv Adytov dvouacovarw 
(c. 38). 

3 Aristophan. Ran. 770, 887, 1066. 

Enripidés says to AXschylus, in regard to the language employed by both 


of them, — f 
*Hy obv od Aéyne AvxaByrrove 
Kat? Mapvacowy jyiv peyédy, robr éort rd xpnora didackery, 
“Ov xp? dpalery dvdpureiag ; 
ZEschylus replies, — . 
7AAN, © axddarpov, dvayKn 
MeyGAav yvoudr Kat dvavoidy ica kat ra pjypara Tikretv. 
KdAdwg eixdc tode futdéouve toic pjuace peiloce xpnotas’ 


389 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


in which he exhibited Gineus, Télephus, Thyestés, Iné, and 
other heroic characters, were unmercifully derided,! though it 
seems that their position and circumstances had always been 
painfully melancholy ; but the effeminate pathos which Euripidés 
brought so nakedly into the foreground, was accounted unworthy 
of the majesty of a legendary hero. And he incurred still great- 
er obloquy on another point, on which he is allowed even by his 
enemies to have only reproduced in substance the preéxisting 
tales, —the illicit and fatal passion depicted in several of his 
female characters, such as Phaedra and Sthenobea. His oppo- 
nents admitted that these stories were true, but contended that 
they ought to be kept back and not produced upon the stage, — 
a proof both of the continued mythical faith and of the more 
sensitive ethical criticism of his age.2 The marriage of the six 





Kail yap toig lwartiou quay ypGvtar Todd ceuvorépoict, 
“A *uod ypnotés Katadeigavtog dteduunve ov. 
Evrirv. Ti dpacac, 
ZEscu. Tpérov piv rode BaoAebovrac pax’ durioxwr, lv’ éAervot 
Toic dvdparr¢ paivowr’ elvat. 

For the character of the language and measures of Euripidés, as represent- 
ed by A@schylus, see also v. 1297, and Pac. 527. Philosophical discussion 
was introduced by Euripidés (Dionys. Hal. Ars Rhetor. viii. 10-ix, 11) about 
the Melanippé, where the doctrine of prodigies (tépa¢) appears to have been 
argued. Quintilian (x. 1) remarks that to young beginners in judicial plead- 
ing, the study of Euripidés was much more specially profitable than that of 
Sopnoklés: compare Dio Chrysostom, Orat. xviii. vol. i. p. 477, Reisk. 

In Euripidés the heroes themselves sometimes delivered moralizing dis 
courses : — elodywv Tov BeAAepopdvtnv yropodoyodvra (Welcker, Griechisch. 
Trag6éd. Eurip. Stheneb. p. 782). Compare the fragments of his Bellero- 
phén (15-25, Matthize), and of his Chrysippus (7, ib.). A striking story is 
found in Seneca, Epistol. 115; and Plutarch, de Audiend. Poetis, c. 4. t. i. p. 
70, Wytt. 

1 Aristophan. Ran. 840. — 

© orwpvacoovarektadn 
Kai rrayoro’ Kat paxioovpparradn * 
See also Aristophan. Acharn. 385-422, For an unfavorable criticism upon 
such proceeding, see Aristotat. Poet. 27. 
? Aristophan. Ran. 1050,— 
Evuxir. [l6repov & ob k bvtTaAdyov rodrov rept Tie Paidpac Suvédnna; 
Ziscn. Ma A?,422 dvr GAM droxpbrrecy xph Td movnpdy Tév ye ToLNT)Y, 
Kai pu rapiyew pnd? diWaoxerv. 
In the Hercules Furens, Euripidés vuts in relief and even exaggerates the 


CENSURES ON EURIPIDES. 389 


daughters to the six sons of olus is of Homeric origin, and 
stands now, though briefly stated, in the Odyssey: but the in- 
cestuous passion of Macareus and Canacé, embodied by Euripidés! 
in the lost tragedy called Zolus, drew upon him severe censure. 
Moreover, he often disconnected the horrors of the old legends 
with those religious agencies-by which they had been originally 
forced on, prefacing them by motives of a more refined character, 
which carried no sense of awful compulsion: thus the considera- 
tions by which the Euripidean Alkmzén was reduced to the ne- 
cessity of killing his mother appeared to Aristotle ridiculous.2 
After the time of this great poet, his successors seem to have 
followed him in breathing into their characters the spirit of com- 
mon life, but the names and plot were still borrowed from the 
stricken mythical families of Tantalus, Kadmus, ete.: and the 
heroic exaltation of all the individual personages introduced, as 
contrasted with the purely human character of the Chorus, is 





worst elements of the ancient mythes: the implacable hatred of Héré towards 
Héraklés is pushed so far as to deprive him of his reason (by sending dowr 
Tris and the unwilling Adcca), and thus intentionally to drive him to slay his 
wife and children with his own hands. 

1 Aristoph. Ran. 849, 1041, 1080; Thesmophor. 547; Nubes, 1354. Grauert, 
De Media Greecorum Comeedia in Rheinisch. Museum, 2nd Jahrs. 1 Heft, p. 
51. It suited the plan of the drama of olus, as composed by Euripidés, to 
place in the mouth of Macareus a formal recommendation of incestuous 
marriages: probably this contributed much to offend the Athenian public. 
See Dionys. Hal. Rhetor. ix. p. 355. 

About the liberty of intermarriage among relatives, indicated in Homer, 
parents and children being alone excepted, see Terpstra, Antiquitas Homericay 
cap. xiii. p. 104. 

Ovid, whose poetical tendencies led him chiefly to copy Euripidés, observes 
(Trist. ii. 1, 380) — 

“Omne genus scripti gravitate Trageedia vincit, 
Hee quoque materiam semper amoris habet. 
Nam quid in Hippolyto nisi cece flamma noverce ? 
Nobilis est Canace fratris amore sui.” 


This is the reverse of the truth in regard to Auschylus and Sophoklés, and 
only very partially true in respect to Euripidés. 

2 Aristot. Ethic. Nicom. iii.1, 8. xa yap rov Etpiridov ’AAkpaiwva yedoia 
¢aiverat Ta dvayKacavra pntpoxtovijcat (In the lost tragedy called ’AAxu» 
iwv 6 d1d Yagidoc). 


390 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


still numbered by Aristotle among the essential ne of the 
theory of tragedy.! 

The tendency then of Athenian tragedy<pareaneny mani- 
fested in Aischylus, and never wholly lost— was to uphold an 
unquestioning faith and a reverential estimate of the general 
mythical world and its personages, but to treat the particular nar- 
ratives rather as matter for the emotions than as recitals of actual 
fact. The logographers worked along with them to the first 
of these two ends, but not to the second. Their grand object 
was, to cast the mythes into a continuous readable series, and 
they were in consequence compelled to make selection between 
inconsistent or contradictory narratives; to reject some narra- 
tives as false, and to receive others as true. But their prefer- 
ence was determined more by their sentiments as to what was 
appropriate, than by any pretended historical test. Pherekydés, 
Akusilaus and Hellanikus? did not seek to banish miraculous or 
fantastic incidents from the mythical world; they regarded it as 
peopled with loftier beings, and expected to find in it phenomena 
not paralleled in their own degenerate days. They reproduced 
the fables as they found them in the poets, rejecting little except 
the discrepancies, and producing ultimately what they believed 
to be not only a continuous but an exact and trustworthy history 
of the past — wherein they carry indeed their precision to such 
a length, that Hellanicus gives the year, and even the day of the 
capture of Troy.3 

Hekatzus of Milétus (500 8. c.), anterior to Pherekydés and 
Hellanikus, is the earliest writer in whom we can detect any dis- 
position to disallow the prerogative and specialty of the mythes, 
and to soften down their characteristic prodigies, some of which 





) Aristot. Poetic. 26-27. And in his Problemata also, in giving the reason 
why the Hypo-Dorian and Hypo-Phrygian musical modes were never as- 
signed to the Chorus, he says — 

Taira 0? dudw xopy pév dvapyocra, Toi¢ J? ard oxnvic olkevérepa. "Exetvot 
pév yap Hpdwv pipntar* ol dé? 7yepbvec Tov dpyatwy pdvot hoav hpwec, ol d& 
Aaot évSpwrot, Gv totiv 6 xopog. Ad wal dpydler ait td yoepdy Kal Hobyiov 
Ios Kal wédog* dvIpurina yap. 

* See Miiller, Prolegom. zu einer wissenschaftlichen Mythologie, ¢. iii. p 
93. 

? Hellanic. Fragment. 143, ed. Didot, 


HERODOTUS, THUCYLDIDES, ETC. 391 


however still find favor in his eyes, as in the case of the speaking 
ram who carried Phryxus over the Hellespont. He pronounced 
the Grecian fables to be “many and ridiculous ;” whether from 
their discrepancies or from their intrinsic. improbabilities we do 
not know: and we owe to him the first attempt to force them with- 
in the limits of historical credibility ; as where he transforms the 
three-headed Cerberus, the dog of Hadés, into a serpent inhabit- 
ing a cayern on Cape Txenarus —and Geryén of Erytheia intoa 
king of Epirus rich in herds of oxen.1 Hekateus traced the 
genealogy of himself and the gens to which he belonged through 
a line of fifteen progenitors up to an initial god,2— the clearest 
proof both of his profound faith in the reality of the mythical 
world, and of his religious attachment to it as the point of junc- 
tion between the human and the divine personality. 

We have next to consider the historians, especially Herodotus 
and. Thucydidés. Like Hekatzus, Thucydidés belonged to a 
gens which traced its descent from Ajax, and through Ajax to 
/®akus and Zeus. Herodotus modestly implies that he himself 
had no such privilege to boast of.4 Their curiosity respecting the 





-' Hekatezi Fragm. ed. Didot. 332, 346,349; Schol. Apollén. Rhod. L. 256 ; 
Athenz. ii. p. 153; Skylax, ec. 26. 

Perhaps Hekateeus was induced to look for Erytheia in Epirus by the 
brick-red color of the earth there in many places, noticed by Pouqueville and 
other travellers (Voyage dans la Gréce, vol. ii. 248: see Klausen, AEneas 
und die Penaten, vol. i. p. 222). ‘Exaraiog 6 M:Ajovog —Aédyov ebpev eixéra, 
Pausan. iii. 25,4. He seems to have written expressly concerning the fabu- 
lous Hyperboreans, and to have upheld the common faith against doubts 
which had begun to rise in his time: the derisory notice of Hyperboreans in 
Herodotus is probably directed against Hekatzeus, iv. 36; Schol. Apollén. 
Rhod. ii. 675 ; Diod6r. ii. 47. 

It is maintained by Mr. Clinton (Fast. Hell. ii. p. 480) and others (see not. 
ad Fragment. Hecatzi, p. 30, ed. Didot), that the work on the Hyperboreans 
was written by Hekatzeus of Abdera, a literary Greek of the age of Ptolemy 
Philadelphus — not by Hekatzus of Milétus. I do not concur in this opin- 
ion. I think i¢ much more probable that the earlier Hekateus was the 
author spoken of. 

The distinguished position held by Hekateus at Milétus is marked not 
only by the notice which Herodotus takes of his opinions on public matters, 
but also by his negotiation with the Persian satrap Artaphernes on behalf of 
his countrymen (Diodér. Excerpt. xlvii. p. 41, ed. Dindorf }. 

? Herodot. ii. 143 3 Marcellin. Vit. Thucyd. init 

* Herodot. ii. 143. 


992 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


past had no other materials to work upon except the mythes; 
but these they found already cast by the logographers into a con« 
tinuous series, and presented as an aggregate of antecedent his- 
tory, chronologically deduced from the times of the gods. In 
common with the body of the Greeks, both Herodotus and Thu- 
cydidés had imbibed that complete and unsuspecting belief in the 
general reality of mythical antiquity, which was interwoven with 
the religion and the patriotism, and all the public demonstrations 
of the Hellenic world. To acquaint themselves with the genuine 
details of this foretime, was an inquiry highly interesting to them: 
but the increased positive tendencies of their age, as well as their 
own habits of personal investigation, had created in them an his- 
torical sense in regard to the past as wellas to the present. Hav 
ing acquired a habit of appreciating the intrinsic tests of histor- 
ical credibility and probability, they found the particular narra- 
tives of the poets and logographers, inadmissible as a whole even 
in the eyes of Hekatzeus, still more at variance with their stricter 
canons of criticism. And we thus observe in them the constant 
struggle, as well as the resulting compromise, between these two 
opposite tendencies; on one hand a firm belief in the reality of 
the mythical world, on the other hand an inability to accept the 
details which their only witnesses, the pocts and logographers, 
told them respecting it. | 
Each of them however performed the process in his own way 
Herodotus is a man of deep and anxious religious feeling; he 
often recognizes the special judgments of the gods as determining 
historical events: his piety is also partly tinged with that mystical 
vein which the last two centuries had gradually infused into the 
religion of the Greeks — for he is apprehensive of giving offence 
to the gods by reciting publicly what he has heard respecting 
them; he frequently stops short in his narrative and intimates 
that there zs a sacred legend, but that he will not tell it: im other 
cases, where he feels compelled to speak out, he entreats forgive- 
ness for doing so from the gods and heroes. Sometimes he will 
not even mention the name of a god, though he generally thinks 
himself authorized to do so, the names being matter of publi¢ 
notoriety.1 Such pious reserve, which the open-hearted Herodo: 


' Herodot. ii. 3, 51, 61, 65,170. He alludes briefly (c. 51) to an /pd¢ Adyoe 
which wes communicated in the Samothracian mysteries, but be does not 











THE MYTHES AS VIEWED BY HERODOTUS. 393 


tus avowedly proclaims as chaining up his tongue, affords a strike 
ing contrast with the plain-spoken and unsuspecting tone of the 
ancient epic, as well as of the popular legends, wherein the gods 
and their proceedings were the familiar and interesting subjects 
of common talk as well as of common sympathy, without ceasing 
to inspire both fear and reverence. 

Herodotus expressly distinguishes, in the comparison of Poly- 
kratés with Minds, the human race to which the former belonged, 
from the divine or heroic race which comprised the latter. But 
he has a firm belief in the authentic personality and parentage of 
all the names in the mythes, divine, heroic and human, as well 
as in the trustworthiness of their chronology computed by gene- 
rations. He counts back 1600 years from his own day to that of 
Semelé, mother of Dionysus; 900 years to Héraklés, and 800 
years to Penelopé, the Trojan war being a little earlier in date2 
Indeed even the longest of these periods must have seemed to him 
comparatively short, seeing that he apparently accepts the prodi- 
gious series of years which the Egyptians professed to draw frem 
a recorded chronology — 17,000 years from their god Héraklés, 
and 15,000 years from their god Osiris or Dionysus, down to 
their king Amasis? (5508. c.) So much was his imagination 
familiarized with these long chronological coraputations barren of 
events, that he treats Homer and Hesiod as “men of yesterday,” 
though separated from his own age by an interval which he reck- 
ons as four hundred years.4 





mention what it was: also about the Thesmophoria, 01 teAeT? of Démétér 
c. 171). 

Kat Hes} pév Tobrwv Tocaira july eixodot, kal mapa 7 w SeGv Kal jpdwv 
ebpéveca ete (c. 45). 

Compare similar scruples on the part of Pausanias (viir. 25 and 37). 

The passage of Herodotus (ii. 3) is equivocal, and has been understood in 
more ways than one (see Lobeck, Aglaopham. p. 1287). 

The aversion of Dionysius of Halikarnassus to reveal the divine secrets is 
not less powerful (see A. R. i. 67, 68), and Pausanias passim. 

1 Herod. iii. 122. ? Herod. ii. 145. 

3 Herodot. ii. 43-145. Kat ratra Aiyirrioe dtpexéwe dact éxictacdur, 
tei Te AoytGouevot Kat det droypagouevot Ta ETEQ, 

4 Herodct, ii. 53. péxps ob xpwhy te Kal ySec, O¢ eltetv Ady. ‘Hotodoy 
yap kat ‘Ounpov fAtxinv tetpaxociover Erect doxéw pev mpecBuTépove yere 
8a, Kal ob wAéoct. 


17* 


394 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


Herodotus had been profoundly impressed with what he saw 
and heard in Egypt. The wonderful monuments, the eviden 
antiquity, and the peculiar civilization of that country, acquired 
such preponderance in his mind over his own native legends, that 
he is disposed to trace even the oldest religious names or institu- 
tions of Greece to Egyptian or Pheenician original, setting aside 
in favor of this hypothesis the Grecian legends of Dionysus and 
Pan.! The oldest Grecian mythical genealogies are thus made 
ultimately to lose themselves in Egyptian or Pheenician antiquity, 
and in the full extent of these genealogies Herodotus firmly be- 
lieves. It does not seem that any doubt had ever crossed his 
mind as to the real personality of those who were named or de- 
scribed in the popular mythes: all of them have once had reality, 
either as men, as heroes, or as gods. The eponyms of cities, 
démés and tribes, are all comprehended in this affirmative cate- 
gory; the supposition of fictitious personages being apparently 
never entertained. Deukalién, Hellén, Dorus,2 — I6n, with his 
four sons, the eponyms of the old Athenian tribes,3—the au- 
tochthonous Titakus and Dekelus,t — Danaus, Lynkeus, Perseus, 
Amphitryén, Alkména, and Héraklés,5 — Talthybius, the heroic 
progenitor of the privileged heraldic gens at Sparta, —the Tyn- 
darids and Helena,® — Agamemnén, Menelaus, and Orestes,? — 
Nestér and his son Peisistratus, — Asdpus, Thébé, and A®gina, 
— Inachus and 16, Xétés and Médea,8 — Melanippus, Adrastus, 
and Amphiarius, as well as Jasén and the Argé,9 — all these are 
occupants of the real past time, and predecessors of himself and 
his contemporaries. In the veins of the Lacedemonian kings 
flowed the blood both of Kadmus and of Danaus, their splendid 
pedigree being traceable to both of these great mythical names : 
Herodotus carries the lineage up through Héraklés first to Per- 
seus and Danaé, then through Danaé to Akrisius and the Egyp- 
tian Danaus; but he drops the paternal lineage when he comes 





1 Herodot. ii. 146. ? Herod. i. 56. — 

3 Herod. v. 66. 4 Herod. ix. 73. 

5 Herod. ii, 43-44, 91-98, 171-182 (the Egyptians admitted the truth of 
the Greek legend, that Perseus had come to Libya to fetch the Gorgon’s 
head). 

6 Herod. ii. 113-120; iv. 145; vii.134. 7 Herod. i. 67-68; ii. 118. vii. 159 

* Herod. i. 1, 2,4; v 81, 65. ® Herod. i. 52; iv. 145; v. 67; vii. 19% 


SS ee 


BELIEF OF HERODOTUS IN MYTHICAL PERSONS. 893 


to Perseus (inasmuch as Perseus is the son of Zeus by Danaé, 
without any reputed human father, such as Amphitryén was to 
Héraklés), and then follow the higher members of the series 
through Danaé alone.! He also pursues the same regal geneal- 
ogy, through the mother of Eurysthenés and Proclés, up to Poly- 
nikés, C&dipus, Laius, Labdakus, Polydérus and Kadmus; and 
he assigns various ancient inscriptions which he saw in the temple 
of the Ismenian Apollo at Thébes, to the ages of Laius and 
CEdipus.2 Moreover, the sieges of Thébes and Troy, —the Ar- 
gonautic expedition, —the invasion of Attica by the Amazons, — 
the protection of the Herakleids, and the defeat and death of 
Eurystheus, by the Athenians,3—the death of Mékisteus and 
Tydeus before Thébes by the hands of Melanippus, and the 
touching calamities of Adrastus and Amphiaraus connected with 
the same enterprise, —the sailing of Kastor and Pollux in the 
Argé,4— the abductions of 16, Eurépa, Médea and Helena, — 
the emigration of Kadmus in quest of Eurépa, and his coming 
to Boeétia, as well as the attack of the Greeks upon Troy to re- 
cover Helen,5— all these events seem to him portions of past 
history, not less unquestionably certain, though more clouded over 
by distance and misrepresentation, than the battles of Salamis 
and Mykalé. 

But though Herodotus is thus easy of faith in regard both to 
the persons and to the general facts of Grecian mytbes, yet when 
he comes to discuss particular facts taken separately, we find him 
applying to them stricter tests of historical credibility, and often 
disposed to reject as well the miraculous as the extravagant. 
Thus even with respect to Héraklés, he censures the levity of 
the Greeks in ascribing to him absurd and incredible exploits ; 
he tries their assertion by the philosophical standard of nature, 
or of determinate powers and conditions governing the course of 
events. “ How is it consonant to nature (he asks), that Héraklés, 
being, as he was, according to the statement of the Greeks, a 
man, should kill many thousand persons? I pray that indulgence 
may be shown to me both by gods and heroes for saying so much 





1 Herod. vi. 52-53. ® Herod. iv. 147; y. 59-61. 
3 Herod y. 61; ix. 27-28. 4 Herod. i. 52; iv. 145; v. 67 
5 Herod. i. 1-4; ii. 49, 113: iv. 147; v. 94. 


896 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


as this.” ‘The religious feelings of Herodotus here told him that 
he was trenching upon the utmost limits of admissible scepti 
cism.! 

Another striking instance of the disposition of Herodotus to 
rationalize the miraculous narratives of the current mythes, is te 
be found in his account of the oracle of Dédéna and its alleged 
Egyptian origin. Here, if in any case, a miracle was not only 
in full keeping, but apparently indispensable to satisfy the exi- 
gences of the religious sentiment; anything less than a miracle 
would have appeared tame and unimpressive to the visitors of se 
revered a spot, much more to the residents themselves. Accord- 
ingly, Herodotus heard, both from the three priestesses and from 
the Dodoneans generally, that two black doves had started at 
the same time from Thébes in Egypt: one of them went to Libya, 
where it directed the Libyans to establish the oracle of Zeus 
Ammon; the other came to the grove of Dédona, and perched 
on one of the venerable oaks, proclaiming with a human voice 
that an oracle of Zeus must be founded on that very spot. The 
injunction of the speaking dove was respectfully obeyed.2 

Such was the tale related and believed at Dédéna. But He- 
rodotus had also heard, from the priests at Thébes in Egypt, a 
different tale, ascribing the origin of all the prophetic establish- 
ments, in Greece as well as in Libya, to two sacerdotal women, 
who had been carried away from Thébes by some Pheenician 





1 Herod. ii. 45. Aéyovot d& roAAd Kai GAda dvertoxéntac ol “EAAnvec- 
évgdye 02 abtéwy Kal bde 6 wide goTL, Tov wept Tod ‘HpaxAéog Aéyovot.... 
-..’Ert dé Eva é6vra tov ‘Hpakdéa, cat Ett dvSpwrov o¢ 67 pact, KG¢ G0otr 
Eye woAAdc pvpradac dovedoat ; Kat rept pév robtwv rocaita juiv eixovet, 
kal wapd Tév Sedv Kal rapa TGV Hpdwy ebuévera ety. 

We may also notice the manner in which the historian criticizes the strat 
agem whereby Peisistratus established himself as despot at Athens —by 
dressing up the stately Athenian woman Phyé in the costume of the goddess 
Athéné, and passing off her injunctions as the commands of the goddess; 
the Athenians accepted her with unsuspecting faith, and received Peisistratus 
at her command. Herodotus treats the whole affair as a piece of extrava- 
gant silliness, tpéyya ety déorarov paxp@ (i. 60). 

2 Herod. ii. 55. Awdwvaiwr dé al ipniat...... Eheyov taita, ovvwpoAdbyeos 
3é opt at of GAA0L Awdwvaior of rept Td ipov. 

The miracle sometimes takes another form; the oak at Déd6na was itself 
once endued with speech (Dionys. Hal. Ars. Rhetoric. i. 6; Strabo). 


HERODOTUS AND THE MIRACLE OF DODONA. 397 


merchants and sold, the one in Greece, the other in Libya. The 
Theban priests boldly assured Herodotus that much pains had 
been taken to discover what had become of these women so ex- 
ported, and that the fact of their having been taken to Greece 
and Libya had been accordingly verified.! 

The historian of Halicarnassus cannot for a moment think of 
admitting the miracle which harmonized so well with the feelings 
of the priestesses and the Dodonwans.2 “ How (he asks) could 
a dove speak with human voice?” But the narrative of the priests 
at Thébes, though its prodigious improbability hardly requires to 
be stated, yet involved no positive departure from the laws of 
nature and possibility, and therefore Herodotus makes no diffi- 
culty in accepting it. The curious circumstance is, that he turns 
the native Dodonzan legend into a figurative representation, or 
rather a misrepresentation, of the supposed true story told by the 
Theban priests. According to his interpretation, the woman who 
came from Thébes to Dédéna was called a dove, and affirmed to 
utter sounds like a bird, because she was non-Hellenic and spoke 
a foreign tongue: when she learned to speak the language of the 
country, it was then said that the dove spoke with a human voice. 
And the dove was moreover called black, because of the woman’s 
Egyptian color. 

That Herodotus should thus bluntly reject a miracle, recount- 
ed to him by the prophetig women themselves as the prime cir- 
eumstance in the ortgines of this holy place, is a proof of the hold 
which habits of dealing with historical evidence had acquired 
over his mind; and the awkwardness of his explanatory media- 
tion between the dove and the woman, marks not less his anxie- 
ty, while discarding the legend, to let it softly down into a story 
quasi-historical and not intrinsically incredible. 

We may observe another example of the unconscious tendency 





1 Herod. ii. 54, 

® Herod. ii.57. "Emel téw tpdry dv rederag ye dvd partyin dura odéysaito; 

According to one statement, the word IleAecd¢ in the Thessalian dialect 
meant both a dove and a prophetess (Scriptor. Rer. Mythicarum, ed. Bede, 
i. 96). Had there been any truth in this, Herodotus could hardly have 
failed to notice it, inasmuch as it woull exactly have helped him out of the 
difficulty which he felt 


398 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


of Herodotus to eliminate from the mythes the idea of speciat 
aid from the gods, in his remarks upon Melampus. He desig. 
nates Melampus “as a clever man, who had acquired for himself 
the art of prophecy ;” and had procured through Kadmus much 
information about the religious rites and customs of Egypt, many 
of which he introduced into Greece! — especially the name, the 
sacrifices, and the phallic processions of Dionysus: he adds, “ that 
Melampus himself did not accurately comprehend or bring out 
the whole doctrine, but wise men who came after him made the 
necessary additions.”2 Though the name of Melampus is here 
maintained, the character described? is something in the vein of 
Pythagoras — totally different from the great seer and leech of 
the old epic mythes—the founder of the gifted family of the 
Amythaonids, and the grandfather of Amphiaradus.4 But that 
which-is most of all at variance with the genuine legendary spirit, 
is the opinion expressed by Herodotus (and delivered with some 
emphasis as his own), that Melampus “ was a clever man, who 
had acquired for himself prophetic powers.” Such a supposition 
would have appeared inadmissible to Homer or Hesiod, or indeed 
to Solén, in the preceding century, in whose view even inferior 
arts come from the gods, while Zeus or Apollo bestows the power 





1 Herod. ii. 49. 'EyO piv viv énue MeAdGuroda yevouevov dvdpa coddv, 
uavtikny Te &wvT> ovoTHoat, Kat Tuddpevov an’ Aiybrtov, GAda Te woAAa 
éonygoacdat “EAAnot, kat ta rept Tov Atévuaor, ddiya abtéy mapaAAd£tayra, 

? Herod. ii. 49. ’Atpexéwe pév ob mavta avAAcBov rov Advov Epave « (Me- 
lampus) 4A’ of émtyvouevot roiTy codtotral pelovuc eeoyvar. 

* Compare Herod. iv. 95; ii. 81. ‘EAAQvav ob ro dodevectary GodtaTa 
Iludaydpa. 

4 Homer, Odyss. xi. 290; xv. 225. Apolloddr. i.9,11-12. Hesiod, Eoiai, 
Fragm. 55, ed. Diintzer (p. 43) — 

‘AAniy piv yap Eduxev ’OAbumto¢g Alakidnot, 
Notvd Apvdaovidace, xdodrov & éxop’ Arpedyot. 
also Frag. 34 (p. 38), and Frag. 65 (p. 45); Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 118. _ 

Herodotus notices the celebrated mythical narrative of Melampus healing 
the deranged Argive women (ix. 34); according to the original legend, the 
daughters of Proetus. In the Hesiodic Eoiai (Fr. 16, Diintz.; Apcllod. ii. 2) 
the distemper of the Proetid females was ascribed to their having repudiated 
the rites and worship of Dionysus (Akusilaus, indeed, assigned a different 
cause), which shows that the old fable recognized a connection between 
Melampus and these rites 


ELIMINATION OF MYTHICAL NARRATIVE. 399 


of prophesying.! The intimation of such an opinion by Herodo- 
tus, himself a thoroughly pious man, marks the sensibly diminish- 
ed omnipresence of the gods, and the increasing tendency to look 
for the explanation of phenomena among more visible and deter- 
minate agencies. 

We may make a similar remark on the dictum of the historian 
respecting the narrow defile of Tempé, forming the embouchure 
of the Péneus and the efflux of all the waters from the Thessa- 
lian basin. The Thessalians alleged that this whole basin of 
Thessaly had once been a lake, but that Poseidén had split the 
chain of mountains and opened the efflux ;? upon which primi- 





' Homer, Iliad, i. 72-87; xv. 412. Odyss. xv. 245-252; iv. 233. Some 
times the gods inspired prophecy for the special occasion, without confer- 
ring upon the party the permanent gift and status of a prophet (compare 
Odyss. i. 202; xvii. 383). Solon, Fragm. xi. 48-53, Schneidewin : — 

*"AdAov pavtiv &Snkev dvak éExaepyoc ’AroAAdy, 
"Eyvo 0 dvdpi kakdv THAOVev epyduevor, 
"Qt ovvopapTncwot Se0t.....606. 

Herodotus himself reproduces the old belief in the special gift of prophetic 
power by Zeus and Apollo, in the story of Euenius of Apollénia (ix. 94). 

See the fine ode of Pindar, describing the birth and inspiration of Jamus, 
eponymous father of the great prophetic family in Elis called the Jamids 
(Herodot. ix. 33), Pindar, Olymp. vi. 40-75. About Teiresias, Sophoc. Cid. 
Tyr. 283-410. Neither Nestor nor Odysseus possesses the gift of prophecy. 

? More than one tale is found elsewhere, similar to this, about the defile 
of Tempé: — 

“ A tradition exists that this part of the country was once a lake, and 
that Solomon commanded two deeves, or genii, named Ard and Beel, to turn 
off the water into the Caspian, which they effected by cutting a passage through 
the mountains; and a city, erected in the newly-formed plain, was named 
after them Ard-u-beel.” (Sketches on the Shores of the Caspian, by W. R. 
Holmes. ) 

Also about the plain of Santa Fe di Bogota, in South America, that it 
Was Once under water, until Bochica cleft the mountains and opened a 
channel of egress (Humboldt, Vues des Cordilléres, p. 87-88); and about 
the plateau of Kashmir (Humboldt, Asie Centrale, vol. i. p 102), drained in 
a like miraculous manner by the saint Kasyapa. The manner, in which 
conjectures, derived from local configuration or peculiarities, are often made 
to assume the form of traditions, is well remarked by the same illustrious 
traveller: “Ce quise présente comme une tradition, n’est souvent que i¢ 
reflet de impression que laisse l’aspect des lieux. Des bancs de coquilles 
& demi-fossiles, répandues dans les isthmes ou sut des plateaux, font naitre 


400 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


tive belief, thoroughly conformable to the genius of Homer and 
Hesiod, Herodotus comments as follows: “The Thessalian state- 
ment is reasonable. For whoever thinks that Poseidon shakes 
the earth, and that the rifts of an earthquake are the work of 
that god, will, on seeing the defile in question, say that Poseidén 
has caused it. For the rift of the mountains is, as appeared to 
me (when I saw it), the work of an earthquake.” Herodotus 
admits the reference to Poseidén, when pointed out to him, but 
it stands only in the background: what is present to his mind is 
the phenomenon of the earthquake, not as a special act, but as 
part of a system of habitual operations.! 





méme chez les hommes les moins avancés dans la culture intellectuelle, 
Vidée de grandes inondations, d’anciennes communications entre des bassins 
limitrophes. Des opinions, que l’on pourroit appeler systématiques, se trou- 
venf dans les foréts de ’Orénoque comme dans les fles de la Mer du Sud 
Dans lune et dans l’autre de ces contrées, elles ont pris la forme des tradi 
tions.” (A. von Humboldt, Asie Centrale, vol. ii. p. 147.) Compare a 
similar remark in the same work and volume, p. 286-294. 

1 Herodot. vii. 129. (Poseid6n was worshipped as Ilerpaiog in Thessaly, 
in commemoration of this geological interference: Schol. Pindar. Pyth. iv. 
245.) Td dé madaidv Aéyeras, obk &6vTog Kw TOd abAdvoc Kal dieKpbov TobToOV, 
TODE TOTUMLOVE TOOTOUC +....000% péovrac moleiv THY Oecoarinv racav méayos. 
Airol pév vev Oéocador Aéyovor Tlocedéwva rorjoar Tov aiAdva, dv’ od péex 
6 IInvetde, oixéra Aéyovtec. “Ootic yap vouiter TlocewWéwva tiv yhv ceiewv, 
Kal Ta dleotedTa bd cetopod Tod Peod TobTov épya eiva, Kal dv éxeivo idav 
gain Mocedéwva rorjoat. "Eort yap cetouod épyov, d¢ éuot édaivero eivat, 
h dtaoraoig TGv ovpéwv. In another case (viii. 129), Herodotus believes that 
Poseid6n produced a preternaturally high tide, in order to punish the Per- 
sians, who had insulted his temple near Potidasa: here was a special motive 
for the god to exert his power. 

This remark of Herodotus illustrates the hostile ridicule cast by ciate 
phanés (in the Nubes) upon Socratés, on the score of alleged impiety, be- 
cause he belonged to a school of philosophers (though in point of fact he 
discountenanced that line of study) who introduced physical laws and forces 
in place of the personal agency of the gods. The old man Strepsiades in 
quires from Socratés, Who rains? Who thunders? To which Socratés re 
plies, “ Not Zeus, but the Nephele, 7. e. the clouds: you never saw rain with- 
out clouds.” Strepsiades then proceeds to inquire—*“ But who is it that 
compels the clouds to move onward? is it not Zeus?” Socratés—~“ Not 
at all; it is ethereal rotation.” Strepsiades—“ Rotation? that had escaped 
me: Zeus then no longer exists, and Rotation reigns in his place,” 

Srrers. ‘0 0’ dvaynalwv éori tig abrac ( Negéac), oby 6 Zede, Gore péoec 
Bat; 


LEGEND OF TROY IN HERODOTUS. 401 


Herodotus adopts the Egyptian version of the legend of Troy, 
founded on that capital variation which seems to have originated 
with Stesichorus, and according to which Helen never left Sparta 
at all—her e¢délon had been taken to Troy in her place. Upon 
this basis a new story had been framed, midway between Homer 
and Stesichorus, representing Paris to have really carried off 
Helen from Sparta, but to have been driven by storms to Egypt; 





Socrat. “Hxior’, dad’ aidépiog divoc. 
STREPS. Aivog; tovti pw éreAnder — 
‘O Zedc obk Ov, dA’ dvr" airod Aivoc vuvt Bactrebwr. 
To the same effect v. 1454, Aivoc BaorAetber rdv Al’ éeAnAaxac —“ Rota 
tion has driven out Zeus, and reigns in his place.” 

If Aristophanés had had as strong a wish to turn the public antipathics 
against Herodotus as against Socratés and Euripidés, the explanation here 
given would have afforded him a plausible show of truth for doing so; “and 
it is highly probable that the Thessalians would have been sufticiently dis- 
pleased with the view of Herodotus to sympathize in the poet's attack upon 
him. The point would have been made (waiving metrical considerations) — 

Decaopude Baotredver, rov Wocerddv’ tednraxée. 
The comment of Herodotus upon the Thessalian view seems almost as if it 
were intended to guard against this very inference. 

Other accounts ascribed the cutting of the defile of Tempé to Héraklés 
(Diodor. iv. 18). 

Respecting the ancient Grecian faith, which recognized the displeasure of 
Poseid6én as the cause of earthquakes, see Xenoph. Hellen. iii. 3, 2; Thucy 
did. i. 127; Strabo, xii. p. 579; Diodor. xv. 48-49. It ceased to give univer- 
sal satisfaction even so early as the time of Thalés and Anaximenés (see 
Aristot. Meteorolog. ii. 7-8; Plutarch, Placit. Philos. iii. 15; Seneca, Natural. 
Quest. vi. 6-23); and that philosopher, as well as Anaxagoras, Democritus 
and others, suggested different physical explanations of the fact. Notwith- 
standing a dissentient minority, however, the old doctrine still continued to 
be generally received: and Diodérus, in describing the terrible earthquake 
in 373 B. c., by which Heliké and Bura were destroyed, while he notices 
those philosophers (probably Kallisthenés, Senec. Nat. Quest. vi. 23) who 
substituted physical causes and laws in place of the divine agency, rejects 
their views, and ranks himself with the religious public, who traced this for- 
midable phenomenon to the wrath of Poseidéa (xv. 48-49). 

The Romans recognized many different gods as producers of earthquakes; 
an unfortunate creed, since it exposed them to the danger of addressing 
their prayers to the wrong god: “ Unde in ritualibus et pontificiis obser- 
vatur, obtemperantibus sacerdotiis caute, ne alio Deo pro alio nominato, 
cum quis eorum terram concutiat, piacula committantur.” (Ammian, Mar 
cell. xvii. 7.) 

VOL. I. 260¢. 


402 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


where she remained during the whole siege of Troy, having been 
detained by Préteus, the king of the country, until Menelaus 
came to reclaim her after his triumph. The Egyptian priests, 
with their usual boldness of assertion, professed to have heard 
the whole story from Menelaus himself—the Greeks had be- 
seiged Troy, in the full persuasion that Helen and the stolen 
treasures were within the walls, nor would they ever believe the 
repeated denials of the Trojans as to the fact of her presence. In 
mtimating his preference for the Egyptian narrative, Herodotus 
betrays at once his perfect and unsuspecting confidence that he is 
dealing with genuine matter of history, and his entire distrust of 
the epic poets, even including Homer, upon whose authority that 
supposed history rested. His reason for rejecting the Homeric 
version is that it teems with historical improbabilities. If Helen 
had been really in Troy (he says), Priam and the Trojans would 
never have been-so insane as to retain her to their own utter 
ruin: but it was the divine judgment which drove them into the 
miserable alternative of neither being able to surrender Helen, 
nor to satisfy the Greeks of the real fact that they had never 
had possession of her—in order that mankind might plainly 
read, in the utter destruction of Troy, the great punishments with 
which the gods visit great misdeeds. Homer (Herodotus thinks) 
had heard this story, but designedly departed from it, because 
it was not so suitable a subject for epic poetry.! 

Enough has been said to show how wide is the difference be- 
tween Herodotus and the logographers with their literal tran- 
script of the ancient legends. Though he agrees with them in 
admitting the full series of persons and generations, he tries the 
circumstances narrated by a new standard. Scruples haye arisen 
in his mind respecting violations of the laws of nature: the poets 





1 Herod. ii. 116. doxéex dé wot kat “Ounpog Tdv Adyov tovrov rudéadar’ GAM 
ob yap dpuoiug ebaperde hy é¢ thy éxorotinn iv tH érépo TH wep exphoato- 
&¢ 6 pete abrov, Onddcac O¢ Kat TodTov ériotaito Tov Aéyov. 

Herodotus then produces a passage from the Iliad, with a view to prove 
that Homer knew of the voyage of Paris and Helen to Egypt; but the 
passage proves nothing at all to the point. 

Again (c. 120), his slender confidence in the epic poets breaks ‘out—el xpA 
Te Tolar érorooior ypecuevov Aévery, 

It is remarkable that Herodotus is disposed to identify Helen with the 
Seivn ’A¢podirn whose temple he saw at Memphis (c. 112). 


THE MYTHES AS TREATED BY THUCYDIDES. 408 


are unworthy of trust, and their narratives must be brought into 
conformity with historical and ethical conditions, before they can be 
admitted as truth. To accomplish this conformity, Herodotus is 
willing to mutilate the old legend in one of its most vital points: 
he sacrifices the personal presence of Helena in Troy, which ran 
through every one of the ancient epic poems belonging to the 
Trojan cycle, and is indeed, under the gods, the great and present 
moving force throughout. 

Thucydidés places himself generally in the same point of view 
as Herodotus with regard to mythical antiquity, yet with some con- 
siderable differences. Though manifesting no belief in present 
miracles or prodigies,! he seems to accept without reserve the pre- 
existent reality of all the persons mentioned in the mythes, and 
of the long series of generations extending back through so many 
supposed centuries: in this category, too, are included the epony- 
mous personages, Hellen, Kekrops, Eumolpus, Pandién, Amphi- 
lochus the son of Amphiaraus, and Akarnan. But on the other 
hand, we find no trace of that distinction between a human and 
an heroic ante-human race, which Herodotus still admitted, —nor 
any respect for Egyptian legends. Thucydidés, regarding the 
personages of the mythes as men of the same breed and stature 
with his own contemporaries, not only tests the acts imputed to 
them by the same limits of credibility, but presumes in them the 
same political views and feelings as he was accustomed to trace 
in the proceedings of Peisistratus or Periklés. He treats the 
Trojan war as a great political enterprise, undertaken by all 
Greece; brought into combination through the imposing power of 





1“ Ut conquirere fabulosa (says Tacitus, Hist. ii. 50, a worthy parallel of 
Thucydidés) et fictis oblectare legentium animos, procul gravitate ccepti 
operis crediderim, ita vulgatis traditisque demere fidem non ausim. Die, 
quo Bebriaci certabatur, avem inusitata specie, apud Regium Lepidum cele- 
bri vieo consedisse, incole memorant; nec deinde ccetu hominum aut cir- 
eumvolitantium alitum, territam pulsamque, donec Otho se ipse interficeret: 
tum ablatam ex oculis: et tempora reputantibus, initium finemque miraculi 
cum Othonis exitu competisse.” Suetonius (Vesp. 5) recounts a different 
miracle, in which three eagles appear. 

This passage of Tacitus occurs immediately after his magnificent descrip- 
tion of the suicide of the emperor Otho, a @eed which he contemplates with 
the most fervent admiration. His feelings were evidently so wi ought up 
that he was content to relax the canons of historical credibility. 


404 HISTORY OF GREECE, 


Agamemnén, not (according to the legendary narrative) through 
the influence of the oath exacted by Tyndareus. Then he ex. 
plains how the predecessors of Agamemnon arrived at so vast a 
dominion — beginning with Pelops, who came over (as he says) 
from Asia with great wealth among the poor Peloponnésians, 
and by means of this wealth so aggrandized himself, though a 
foreigner, as to become the eponym of the peninsula. Next fol- 
lowed his son Atreus, who acquired after the death of Eurystheus 
the dominion of Mykénx, which had before been possessed by 
the descendants of Perseus: here the old legendary tale, which 
described Atreus as having been banished by his father Pelops 
in consequence of the murder of his elder brother Chrysippus, is 
invested with a political bearing, as explaining the reason why 
Atreus retired to Mykénz. Another legendary tale— the defeat 
and death of Eurystheus by the fugitive Herakleids in Attica, so 
celebrated in Attic tragedy as having given occasion to the gen- 
erous protecting intervention of Athens —is also introduced as 
furnishing the cause why Atreus succeeded to the deceased Eurys- 
theus: “for Atreus, the maternal uncle of Eurystheus, had been 
entrusted by the latter with his government during the expedition 
into Attica, and had effectually courted the people, who were 
moreover in great fear of being attacked by the Herakleids.” 
Thus the Pelopids acquired the supremacy in Peloponnésus, and 
Agamemnén was enabled to get together his 1200 ships and 
100,000 men for the expedition against Troy. Considering that 
vontingents were furnished from every portion of Greece, Thuey- 
didés regards this as a small number, treating the Homeric cata- 
logue as an authentic muster-roll, perhaps rather exaggerated 
than otherwise. He then proceeds to tell us why the armament 
was not larger: many more men could have been furnished, but 
there was not suflicient money to purchase provisions for their 
subsistence; hence they were compelled, after landing and gaining 
a victory, to fortify their camp, to divide their army, and to send 
away one portion for the purpose of cultivating the Chersonese, 
and another portion to sack the adjacent. towns. This was the 
grand reason why the siege lasted so long as ten years. For if 
it had been possible to keep the whole army together, and to act 


THUCYDIDES ON fHe WAR OF TROY. 403 


with an undivided force, Troy would have been taken both earlier 
and at smaller cost.1 

Such is the general sketch of the war of Troy,as given by 
Thucydidés. So different is it from the genuine epical narrative, 
that we seem hardly to be reading a description of the same 
event; still less should we imagine that the event was known, 
to him as well as to us, only through the epic poets themselves. 
The men, the numbers, and the duration of the siege, do indeed 
remain the same; but the cast and juncture of events, the deter- 
mining forces, and the characteristic features, are altogether het- 
erogeneous. But, like Herodotus, and still more than Herodotus, 
Thucydidés was under the pressure of two conflicting impulses 
—he shared the general faith in the mythical antiquity, but at 
the same time he could not believe in any facts which contradict- 
ed the laws of historical credibility or probability. He was thus 
under the necessity of torturing the matter of the old mythes 
into conformity with the subjective exigencies of his own mind: 
he left out, altered, recombined, and supplied new connecting 
principles and supposed purposes, until the story became such as 
no one could have any positive reason for calling in question: 
though it lost the impressive mixture of religion, romance, and 
individual adventure, which constituted its original charm, it ac- 
quired a smoothness and plausibility, and a poetical ensemble, 
which the critics were satisfied to accept as historical truth. And 
historical truth it would doubtless have been, if any independent 
evidence could have been found to sustain it. Had Thucydidés 
been able to produce such new testimony, we should have been 
pleased to satisfy ourselves that the war of Troy, as he recounted 
it, was the real event; of which the war of Troy, as sung by the 
epic poets, was a misreported, exaggerated, and ornamented re- 
cital. But in this case the poets are the only real witnesses, and 
the narrative of Thucydidés is a mere extract and distillation 
from their incredibilities. 

A few other instances may be mentioned to illustrate the views 
of Thucydidés respecting various mythical incidents. 1. He 
treats the residence of the Homeric Pheakians at Corkyra as an 
undisputed fact, and employs it partly to explain the efficiency of 





? Thucyd. i. 9-12. 


406 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


the Korkyrean navy in times preceding the Peloponnesian war. 
2. He notices, with equal confidence, the story of Téreus and 
Prokné, daughter of Pandién, and the murder of the child Itys 
by Prokné his mother, and Philoméla; and he produces this 
ancient mythe with especial reference to the alliance between the 
Athenians and Térés, king of the Odrysian Thracians, during the 
time of the Peloponnesian war, intimating that the Odrysian 
Térés was neither of the same family nor of the same country as 
Téreus the husband of Prokné.2 The conduct of Pandién, in 
giving his daughter Prokné in marriage to Téreus, is in his view 
dictated by political motives and interests. 38. He mentions the 
Strait of Messina as the place through which Odysseus is said to 
have sailed.3 4. The Cyclopes and the Lestrygones (he says) 
were the most ancient reported inhabitants of Sicily; but he can- 
not tell to what race they belonged, nor whence they came.4 5. 
Italy derived its name from Italus, king of the Sikels. 6. Eryx 
and Egesto in Sicily were founded by fugitive Trojans after the 
capture of Troy; also Skioné, in the Thracian peninsula of Pal. 
léné, by Greeks from the Achwan town of Pelléné, stopping 
thither in their return from the siege of Troy: the Amphilochian 
Argos in the Gulf of Ambrakia was in like manner founded by 





1 Thucyd. i. 25. 

2 Thucyd. ii. 29. Ka? 7d Epyov 7d rept rdv “Irvv ai yovaines dy TH a rabr9 
Expagfav* moAAoic 6& Kal tév rointav év anddvog prviuy Aaviude @ dpvig 
érwvopactat. Rixdc d3 cal 7d Kjdo¢ Tavdiova Suvapacdar rig Svyarpd¢ dia 
tooobTov, én’ Opedeia TH mpde GAAHAOVE, paAAOV h Oda TOAAGY Huepav é¢ 
’Odpiaac bd0d. The first of these sentences would lead us to infer, if it came 
from any other pen than that of Thucydidés, that the writer believed the 
metamorphosis of Philoméla into a nightingale: see above, ch. xi. p. 270. 

The observation respecting the convenience of neighborhood for the mar- 
riage is remarkable, and shows how completely Thucydidés regarded the 
event as historical. What would he have said respecting the marriage of 
Oreithyia, daughter of Erechtheus, with Boreas, and the prodigious distance 
which she is reported to have been carried by her husband? ‘Yxép te tovtov 
mavr’, ér’ éoxara x8ovec, etc. (Sophoklés ap. Strabo. vii. p. 295.) 

From the way in which Thucydidés introduces the mention of this event, 
we see that he intended to correct the misapprehension of his eqantrymen, 
who having just made an alliance with the Odrysian Térés, were led by that 
circumstance to think of the old mythical Téreus, and to regard him as the 
ancestor of Térés. ; 

> Thucyd. iv. 24. 4 Thueyd. vi. 2. 


Ee ee ewe CU 


MYTHICAL NOTICES IN THUCYDIDES. 40? 


Amphilochus son of Amphiaraus, in his return from the same 
enterprise. The remorse and mental derangement of the matri- 
cidal Alkmzén, son of Amphiariius, is also mentioned by Thucy- 
didés,! as well as the settlement of his son Akarnan in the country 
called after him Akarnania.2 

Such are the special allusions made by this illustrious author 
in the course of his history to mythical events. From the tenor 
of his language we may see that he accounted all that could be 
known about them to be uncertain and unsatisfactory; but he has 
it much at heart to show, that even the greatest were inferior in 





1 Thucyd. ii. 68-102; iv.120; yi. 2. Antiochus of Syracuse, the contem 
porary of Thucydidés, also mentioned Italus as the eponymous king of Italy . 
he farther named Sikelus, who came to Morgos, son of Italus, after having 
been banished from Rome. He talks about Italus, just as Thucydidés talks 
about Théseus, as a wise and powerful king, who first acquired a great 
dominion (Dionys. H. A. R. i. 12, 35, 73). Aristotle also mentioned Italus 
in the same general terms (Polit. vii. 9,2). 

2 We may here notice some particulars respecting Isokratés. He mani 
fests entire confidence in the authenticity of the mythical genealogies and 
chronology ; but while he treats the mythical personages as historically real, 
he regards them at the same time not as human, but as half-gods, superior 
to humanity. About Helena, Théseus, Sarpédon, Cycnus, Memnén, Achil- 
les, etc., see Encom. Helen. Or. x. pp. 282, 292, 295. Bek. Helena was wor- 
shipped in his time as a goddess at Therapne (7). p. 295). He recites the 
settlements of Danaus, Kadmus, and Pelops in Greece, as undoubted histori- 
eal facts (p. 297). In his discourse called Busiris, he accuses Polykratés, tho 
sophist, of a gross anachronism, in having placed Busiris subsequent in point 
of date to Orpheus and olus (Or. xi. p. 301, Bek.), and he adds that ths 
tale of Busiris having been slain by Héraklés was chronologically impossible 
(p. 309). Of the long Athenian genealogy from Kekrops to Théseus, he 
speaks with perfect historical confidence (Panathenaic. p. 349, Bek.) ; not 
less so of the adventures of Héraklés and his mythical contemporaries, whicb 
he places in the mouth of Archidamus as a justification of the Spartan title 
to Messenia (Or. vi. Archidamus, p. 156, Bek. ; compare Or. y. Philippus, pp- 
114, 138), daouv, oi¢ wept TGv wadaiov mioTebouer, etc. He condemns the 
poets in strong language for the wicked and dissolute tales which they cir- 
culated respecting the gods: many of them (he says) had been punished fo 
such blasphemies by blindness, poverty, exile, and other misfortunes (Or. x3 
p- 309, Bek.). 

In general, it may be said that Isokratés applies no principles of historica’ 
eriticism to the mythes; he rejects such as appear to him discreditable or 
unworthy, and believes the rest. 


408 HISTORY OF GREECK. 


magnituae and importance to the Peloponnesian war.! In this 
respect his opinion seems to have been at variance with that 
which was popular among his contemporaries. ' 





1 Thucyd. i, 21-22, 

The first two volumes of this history have been noticed in an able article 
of the Quarterly Review, for October, 1846; as well as in the Heidelberger 
Jahrbticher der Literatur (1846. No. 41. pp. 641-655), by Professor Kortiim. 

While expressing, on several points, approbation of my work, by which I 
feel much flattered — both my English and my German critic take partial 
objection to the views respecting Grecian legend. While the Quarterly Re- 
viewer contends that the mythopeeic faculty of the human mind, though 
essentially loose and untrustworthy, is never creative, but requires some basis 
of fact to work upon — Kortiim thinks that I have not done justice to Thucy- 
didés, as regards his way of dealing with legend; that I do not allow sufli- 
cient weight to the authority of an historian so circumspect and so cold- 
blooded (den kalt-blathigsten und besonnensten Historiker des Alterthums, 
p- 653) as a satisfactory voucher for the early facts of Grecian history in his 
preface (Herr G. Fehlt also, wenn er das anerkannt kritische Pro-cemium als 
Gewihrsmann verschmiaht, p. 654). 

No man feels more powerfully than I do the merits of Thucydidés as an 
historian, or the value of the example which he set in multiplying critical in- 
quiries respecting matters recent and verifiable. But the ablest judge or 
advocate, in investigating specific facts, can proceed no further than he finds 
witnesses having the means of knowledge, and willing more or leas to tell. 
truth. In reference to facts prior to 776 B.c., Thucydidés had nothing before 
him except the legendary poets, whose credibility is not at all enhanced by 
the circumstance that he accepted them as witnesses, applying himself only 
to cut down and modify their allegations. His credibility in regard to the 
specific facts of these early times depends altogether upon theirs. Now we 
in our day are in a better position for appreciating their credibility than he 
was in his, since the foundations of historical evidence are so much more fully 
understood, and good or bad materials for history are open to comparison in 
such large extent and variety. Instead of wondering that he shared the 
general faith in such delusive guides — we ought rather to give him credit 
for the reserve with which he qualified that faith, and for the sound idea of 
historical possibility to which he held fast as the limit of his confidence. 
But it is impossible to consider Thucydidés as a satisfactory guarantee 
(Gewihrsmann ) for matters of fact which he derives only from such sources, 

Professor Kortiim considers that I am inconsistent with myself in refusing 
to discriminate particular matters of historical fact among the legends — 
and yet in accepting these legends (in my chap. xx.) as giving a faithful mir 
ror of the general state of early Grecian society (p. 653). It appears to me 
that this is no inconsistency, but a-real and important distinction. Whether 
Héraklés, Agamemnon, Odysseus, etc. were real persons,and performed all, 


EPNORUS, THEOPOMPUS, XENOPHON, ETC. 409 


To touch a little upon the later historians by whom these 
mythes were handled, we find that Anaximenés of Lampsacus 
composed a consecutive history of events, beginning from the 
Theogony down to the battle of Mantineia.! But Ephorus pro- 
fessed to omit all the mythical narratives which are referred to 
times anterior to the return of the Herakleids, (such restriction 
would of course have banished the siege of Troy,) and even re- 
proved those who introduced mythes into historical writing; 
adding, that everywhere truth was the object to be aimed at.2 
Yet in practice he seems often to have departed from his own 
rule.3 ‘Cheopompus, on the other hand, openly proclaimed that 





or a part, of the possible actions ascribed to them —I profess myself unable 
to determine But eyen assuming both the persons and their exploits to be 
fictions, these very fictions will have been conceived and put together in con- 
formity to the general social phenomena among which the describer and his 
hearers lived —and will thus serve as illustrations of the manners then preva- 
lent. In fact, the real value of the Preface of Thucydidés, upon which Pro- 
fessor Korttim bestows such just praise, consists, not in the particular facts 
which he brings out by altering the legends, but in the rational general views 
which he sets forth respecting early Grecian society, and respecting the steps 
as well as the causes whereby it attained its actual position as he saw it. 

Professor Kortiim also affirms that the mythes contain “real matter of 
fact along with mere conceptions :” which affirmation is the same as that of 
the Quarterly Reviewer, when he says that the mythopeic faculty is not 
creative. Taking the mythes in the mass, I doubt not that this is true, ner 
have I anywhere denied it. Taking them one by one, I neither affirm nor 
deny it. My position is, that, whether there be matter of fact or not, we have 
no test whereby it can be singled out, identified, and severed from the accom- 
panying fiction. And it lies upon those, who proclaim the practicability of 
such severance, to exhibit some means of verification better than any which 
has been yet pointed out. If Thucydidés has failed in doing this, it is cer- 
tain that none of the many authors who have made the same attempt after 
him have been more successful. 

It cannot surely be denied that the mythopeeic faculty is creative, when we 
have before us so many divine legends, not merely in Greece, but in other 
countries also. ‘To suppose that these religious legends are mere exaggera- 
tions, etc. of some basis of actual fact—that the gods of polytheism were 
merely divinized men, with qualities distorted or feigned — would be to em- 
brace im substance the theory of Euémerus. 

1 Diodor. xv. 89. He was a contemporary of Alexander the Great. 

2 Diodér. iv. 1. Strabo, ix. p. 422, éririunoas roic grAouvdodow ev ri Tij¢ 

Tapiac ypad7. 

® Ephorus recounted the principal adventures of Héraklés (Fragm. 8, % 

VOL. 1 18 


410 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


he could narrate fables in-his history better than Herodetus, or 
Ktesias, or Hellanicus.1 The fragments which remain to us, 
exhibit some proof that this promise was performed as to quan- 
tity ;2 though as to his style of narration, the judgment of Dio- 
nysius is unfavorable. Xenophén ennobled his favorite amuse- 
ment of the chase by numerous examples chosen from the heroic 
world, tracing their portraits with all the simplicity of an undi- 
minished faith. Kallisthenés, like Ephorus, professed to omit all 
mythes which referred to a time anterior to the return of the Hera 
kleids; yet we know that he devoted a separate book or portion of 
his history to the Trojan war.? Philistus introduced some mythes 
in the earlier portions of his Sicilian history ; but'Timzus was dis- 
tinguished above all others for the copious and indiscriminate way 
in which he collected and repeated such legends.4 Some of these 





ed. Marx.), the tales of Kadmus and Harmonia (Fragm. 12), the banish- 
ment of Ztdlus from Elis (Fragm. 15; Strabo, viii. p. 357); he drew in- 
ferences from the chronology of the Trojan and Theban wars (Fragm. 28) ; 
he related the coming of Dedalus to the Sikan king Kokalus, and the expe- 
dition of the Amazons (Fragm. 99-103). 

He was particularly copious in his information about «tices, drorxias ond 
ovyyeveiat (Polyb. ix. 1). 

1 Strabo, i. p. 74. 

* Dionys. Halic. De Vett. Scriptt. Judic. p, 428, Reisk; lian, V. H. iii. 
18, OedmouTrog...-.- decvdg pvdd2oyoc. 

Theopompus affirmed, that the bodies of those who went into the forbid- 
den precinct (rd 4Barov) of Zens, in Arcadia, gave no. shadow (Polyb. xvi. 
12). He recounted the story of Midas and Silénus (Fragm. 74, 75, 76, ed. 
Wichers) ; he said a good deal about the heroes of Troy; and he seems to 
have assigned the misfortunes of the Ndcroz to an historical cause — the rot- 
tenness of the Grecian ships, from the length of the siege, while the genuine 
epic ascribes it to the anger of Athéné (Fragm. 112, 113, 114; Schol. 
Homer. Iliad. ii. 135); he narrated an alleged expulsion of Kinyras from 
Cyprus by Agamemnon (Fragm. 111); he gave the genealogy of the Mace 
donian queen Olympias up to Achilles and AZakus (Fragm, 232). 

3 Cicero, Epist. ad Familiar. y. 12; Xenophén de Venation. c. 1. 

4 Philistus, Fragm. 1 (Goller), Deedalus, and Kokalus; about Liber and 
Juno (Fragm. 57) ; about the migration of the Sikels,into Sicily, eighty years 
after the Trojan war (ap. Dionys. Hal. i. 3). 

Timeus Fragm. 50, 51,52, 53, Goller) related many fables respecting 
Jason, Médea, and the Argonauts generally. The miscarriage of the Athe 
nian armament under Nikias, before Syracuse, is imputed to the anger of 
Héraklés against the Athenians because they came to assist the Dgestara 


EUEMERUS. 411 


writers employed their ingenuity in transforming the mythical 
circumstances into plausible matter of history: Ephorus, in par- 
ticular, converted the serpent Pythé, slain by Apollo, into a ty- 
rannical king.! 

But the author who pushed this transmutation of legend into 
history to the greatest length, was the Messenian Euémerus, con- 
temporary of Kassander of Macedén. He melted down in this 
way the divine persons and legends, as well as the heroic — rep- 
resenting both gods and heroes as having been mere earthborn 
men, though superior to the ordinary level in respect of force 
and capacity, and deified or heroified after death as a recompense 
for services or striking exploits. In the course of a voyage into 
the Indian sea, undertaken by command of Kassander, Euémerus 
professed to have discovered.a fabulous country called Panchaia, 
in which was a temple of the Triphylian Zeus: he there de- 
scribed a golden column, with an inscription purporting to have 
been put up by Zeus himself, and detailing his exploits while on 
earth.2 Some eminent men, among whom may be numbered 
Polybius, followed the views of Euémerus, and the Roman poet 
Ennius? translated his Historia Sacra; but on the whole he never 
acquired favor, and the unblushing inventions which he put into 
circulation were of themselves sufficient to disgrace both the au- 
thor and his opinions. The doctrine that all the gods had once 
existed as mere men offended the religious pagans, and drew 
upon Euémerus the imputation of atheism; but, on the other 
hand, it came to be warmly espoused by several of the Christian 
assailants of paganism,— by Minucius Felix, Lactantius, and 
St. Augustin, who found the ground ready prepared for them in 
their efforts to strip Zeus and the other pagan gods of the attri- 
butes of deity. They believed not only in the main theory, but 
also in the cop.ous details of Euémerus ; and the same man whom 
Strabo casts aside as almost a proverb for mendacity, was ex- 





descendants of Troy (Plutarch, Nikias, 1),—a naked reproduction of gen- 
uine epical agencies by an historian; also about Diomédés and the Dauni- 
ans; Phaéthén and the river Eridanus ; the combats of the Gigantes in the 
' Philegrsean plains (Fragm. 97, 99, 102). 

1 Strabo, ix. p. 422. 

2 Compare Diodér. vy. 44-46; and Lactantius, De Falsa Relig. 1. 11. 

3 Cicero, De Natura Deor. i. 42; Varro, De Re Rust. i. 48. 


412 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


tolled by them as an excellent specimen of careful historical 
inquiry.} 

But though the pagan world repudiated that “lowering tone 
of explanation,” which effaced the superhuman personality of 
Zeus and the great gods of Olympus, the mythical persons and 
narratives generally came to be surveyed more and more from 
the point of view of history, and subjected to such alterations as 
might make them look more like plausible matter of fact. Po- 
lybius, Strabo, Diod6rus, and Pausanias, cast the mythes into 
historical. statements — with more or less of transformation, as 
the case may require, assuming always that there is a basis of 
truth, which may be discovered by removing poetical exaggera- 
tions and allowing for mistakes. Strabo, in particular, lays down 
that principle broadly and unequivocally in his remarks upon 
Homer. To give pure fiction, without any foundation of fact, 
was in his judgment utterly unworthy of so great a genius; and 
he comments with considerable acrimony on the geographer Era-. 
tosthenés, wh) maintains the opposite opinion. Again, Polybius 
tells us that the Homeric AXolus, the dispenser of the winds by 





1 Strabo, ii. p. 102, Od road ody Aeizerat Tadta Tov ivew cat Einuépor 
kai ’Avtidavoue evouarov; compare also i. p. 47, and ii. p. 104. | sy 

St. Augustin, on the contrary, tells us (Civitat. Dei, vi. 7), “ Quid de ipsc 
Jove senserunt, qui nutricem ejus in Capitolio posuerunt? Nonne attestati 
sunt omnes Euemero, qui non fabulosd garrulitate, sed historicd diligentid, 
homines fuisse mortalesque conscripsit?” And Minucius Felix (Octay. 20- 
21), “Euemerus exequitur Deorum natales: patrias, sepulcra dinumerat, et 
per provincias monstrat, Dictzi Jovis, et Apollinis Delphici, et Phariz Isidis, 
et Cereris Eleusiniz.” Compare Augustin, Civit. Dei, xviii. 8-14; and 
Clemens Alexand. Cohort. ad Gent. pp. 15-18, Sylb. 

Lactantius (De Falsi Relig. c. 13,14, 16) gives copious citations from 
Ennius’s translation of the Historia Sacra of Euémerus. 

Ebjuepoc, 6 éxixaAndete GSeo¢, Sextus Empiricus, ady, Physicos, ix. § 17- 
51. Compare Cicero, De Nat. Deor. i. 42; Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride, 
c, 28. tom. ii. p. 475, ed. Wytt. 

Nitzsch assumes (Helden Sage der Griechen, sect. 7. p. 84.) that the voy- 
age of Euémerus to Panchaia was intended only as an amusing romance, 
and that Strabo, Polybius, Eratosthenés and Plutarch were mistaken in con- 
struing it as a serious recital. Bdéttiger, in his Kunst-Mythologie der Grie- 
chen (Absch. ii. s. 6. p. 190), takes thesame view. But not the least reason is 
given for adopting this opinion, and it seems to me far-fetched and improbable, 
Lobeck (Aglaopham. p. 989), though Nitzsch alludes to him as hclding it 
manifests no such tendency, as far as I can observe. 


POLYBIUS, DIODORUS, ETC. 413 


appointment from Zeus, was in reality a man eminently skilled 
in navigation, and exact in predicting the weather ; that the Cy- 
clépes and Lestrygones were wild and savage real men in Sicily ; 
and that Scylla and Charybdis were a figurative representation 
of dangers arising from pirates in the Strait of Messina. Strabo 
speaks of the amazing expeditions of Dionysus and Héraklés, 
and of the long wanderings of Jasén, Menelaus, and Odysseus, 
in the same category with the extended commercial range of the 
Pheenician merchant-ships: he explains the report of Théseus 
and Peirithéus having descended to Hadés, by their dangerous 
earthly pilgrimages, — and the invocation of the Dioskuri as the 
protectors of the imperiled mariner, by the celebrity which they 
had acquired as real men and navigators. 

Diodérus gave at considerable Jength versions of the current 
fables respecting the most illustrious names in the Grecian myth- 
ical world, compiled confusedly out of distinct and incongruous 
authors. Sometimes the mythe is reproduced in its primitive 
simplicity, but for the most part it is partially, and sometimes 
wholly, historicized. Amidst this jumble of dissentient authori- 
ties we can trace little of a systematic view, except the general . 
conviction that there was at the bottom of the mythes a real 
chronological sequence of persons, and real matter of fact, his- 
torical or ultra-historical. Nevertheless, there are some few 
occasions on which Diodérus brings us back.a step nearer to the 
point of view of the old logographers. For, in reference to 
Héraklés, he protests against the scheme of cutting down the 
mythes to the level of present reality, and contends that a special 
standard of ultra-historical credibility ought to be constituted, so 
as to include the mythe in its native dimensions, and do fitting 
honor to the grand, beneficent, and superhuman personality of 
Héraklés and other heroes or demi-gods. To apply to such per- 
sons the common measure of humanity (he says), and to cavil at 
the glorious picture which grateful man has drawn of them, is at 
once ungracious and irrational. All nice criticism into the truth 
of the legendary narratives is out of place: we show our reve- 
rence to the god by acquiescing in the incredibilities of his his- 
tory, and we must be content with the best guesses which we can 
make, amidst the inextricable confusion and numberless discrep 


414 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


ancies which they present.! Yet though Diodérus here exhibits 
a preponderance of the religious sentiment over the purely his- 
torical point of view, and thus reminds us of a period earlier 
than Thucydidés — he in another place inserts a series of stories 
which seem to be derived from Euémerus, and in which Uranus, 
Kronus, and Zeus appear reduced to the character of human 
kings celebrated for their exploits and benefactions.2 Many of 
the authors, whom Diodorus copies, have so entangled together 
Grecian, Asiatic, Egyptian, and Libyan fables, that it becomes 
impossible to ascertain how much of this heterogeneous mass can 
be considered as at all connected with the genuine Hellenic 
mind. 

Pausanias is far more strictly Hellenic in his view of the Gre- 
cian mythes than Dioddérus: his sincere piety makes him inclined 
to faith generally with regard to the mythical narratives, but 
subject nevertheless to the frequent necessity of historicizing or 
allegorizing them. His belief in the general reality of the myth- 
ical history and chronology is complete, in spite of the many 





' Diodér. iv. 1-8. "Eviot yap trav dvay:vwoxdvtwr, od dixaia xpopevot Kpicet, 
raxpiBeg éxilytovo év Taig dpyaiarc uvbodoyiate, éxione roig mpatropmévotc 
év TO KaW’ Rude Xpovy, Kal Ta dioTafoueva TGV Epywv did Td péyeSoc, ék Tod 
Kad’ abrode Biov Texpatpouevot, Tv “Hpakdéove diva éx tig doSrvetac TOV 
viv dvdporwv Sewpodto.r, Gore did tiv brepBoAny tod peyédove tov Epywv 
inoreiodat thy ypadny. Kavtédov yap év rai¢ dpyaiate pvdodoyiate obK éx 
mavto¢ Tpomov TLKpGe THY GAHVetav tieracréov. Kal yap dv 
toig Yedtpog mMem@eLopévor unre Kevratvpove dipveic 8 érepoye- 
vov oopator brapgat, uate Vnpvovyv rprodparoy, buwso mpocdexopeva 
ra¢g ToLatvracg putorAoyiac, kal taic értonpaciats ovvavé- 
omev THY TOD Veo Timgjy. Kal yap dromov, ‘Hpaxdéa piv ere kar 
ivdparovg bvta Toig idioug mévoic éEnpepHoat tiv oixovpévny, trode 0 dvips. 
rove, émiAavopévove tig Kowing evepyeciag, ovKOpavTEiv Tov ext Tois 
KaAriorotc épyows Eratvoy, etc. 

This is aremarkable passage : first, inasmuch as it sets forth the total inap- 
plicability of analogies drawn from the historical past as narratives about 
Héraklés ; next, inasmuch as it suspends the employment of critical and 
scientific tests, and invokes an acquiescence interwoven and identified with 
the feelings, as the proper mode of evincing pious reverence for the god 
Héraklés. It aims at reproducing exactly that state of mind to which the 
mythes were addressed, and with which alone they could ever be in thorough 
harmony. , 

* Diodér. iii 45-60; v. 44-46. 


PALEPHATUS. 415 


discrepancies which he finds in it, and which he is unable te 
reconcile. 

Another author who seems to have conceived clearly, and 
applied consistently, the semi-historical theory of the Grecian 
mythes, is Palephatus, of whose work what appears to be a short 
abstract has been preserved.! In the short preface of this trea- 
tise “ concerning Incredible Tales,” he remarks, that some men, 
from want of instruction, believe all the current narratives; while 
others, more searching and cautious, disbelieve them altogether. 
Each of these extremes he is anxious to avoid. On the one 
hand, he thinks that no narrative could ever have acquired cre- 
dence unless it had been founded in truth; on the other, it is 
impossible for him to accept so much of the existing narratives 
as conflicts with the analogies of present natural phenomena. 
If such things ever had been, they would still continue to be — 
but they never have so occurred; and the extra-analogical features 
of the stories are to be ascribed to the license of the poets. Pala 
phatus wishes to adopt a middle course, neither accepting al! 
nor rejecting all: accordingly, he had taken great pains to sepa- 
rate the true from the false in many of the narratives; he ha¢ 
visited the localities wherein they had taken place, and mad. 
careful inquiries from old men and others.2 The results of his 





1 The work of Palephatus, probably this original, is alluded to in the 
Ciris of Virgil (88):— 

“Docta Palephatia testatur voce papyrus.” 

The date of Palephatus is unknown— indeed this passage of the Ciris 
seems the only ground that there is for inference respecting it. That which 
we-now possess is probably an extract from a larger work — made by another 
person at some later time: see Vossius de Historicis Greecis, p. 478, ed. 
Westermann. 

2 Palephat. init. ap. Script. Mythogr. ed. Westermann, p. 268. Tov 
dv8poruv oi piv reidovtar maat Toig Aeyouévorc, d¢ GvoutAnrot cogiac Kal 
éxtornung — ol dé muKvdtepor tiv dbo Kat wodumpaypovec amtoTodeL Td 
raparav undév yevéoSat robtwv. ‘Epol d2 doxet yevéoSat navta Ta Aey6- 
pevar, cscs yevopueva dé tiva of xointal Kat Aoyéypagot mapétpepav eic 7d 
dmvorérepov Kal Gavuactorepov rod Savudlery vera trode advOpdrove. ’Eyd 
d2 yivOonw, Ste ob dévarat ra Toraita elvat ola Kat AéyeTrat* TodTo dé Kat 
WeiAnga, bre ei uh eyévero, ob dv ehéyero. 

The main assumption of the semi-historical theory is here shortly and 

learly stated. 

One of the early Christian writers, Minucius Felix, is astonished at the 

asy belief of his pagan forefathers in miracles If ever such things had 


416 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


researches are presented in a rew version of fifty legends, among 
the most celebrated and the most fabulous, comprising the Cen« 
taurs, Pasiphaé, Akteeén, Kadmus and the Sparti, the Sphinx, 
Cyenus, Dedalus, the Trojan horse, /Kolus, Scylla, Gerydn, 
Bellerophon, ete. 

It must be confessed that Palephatus has performed his promise 
of transforming the “incredibilia” into narratives in themselves 
plausible and unobjectionable, and that in doing so he always 
follows some thread of andlogy, real or verbal. ‘The Centaurs 
(he tells us) were a body of young men from the village of 
Nephelé in Thessaly, who first trained and mounted horses for 
the purpose of repelling a herd of bulls belonging to Ixién king 
of the Lapith, which had run wild and done great damage: 
they pursued these wild bulls on horseback, and pierced them 
with their spears, thus acquiring both the name of Prickers 
(xévroges) and the imputed attribute of joint body with the 
horse. Akteeén was an Arcadian, who neglected the cultivation 
of his land for the pleasures of hunting, and was thus eaten up 
by the expense of his hounds. The dragon whom Kadmus 
killed at Thébes, was in reality Drako, king of Thébes; and the 
dragon’s teeth which he was said to have sown, and from whence 
sprung a crop of armed men, were in point of fact elephants’ 
teeth, which Kadmus as a rich Phoenician had brought over with 
him: the sons of Drako sold these elephants’ teeth and employed 
the proceeds to levy troops against Kadmus. Deedalus, instead 
of flying across the sea on wings, had escaped from Kréte in a 
swift sailing-boat under a violent storm: Kottus, Briareus, and 
Gygés were not persons with one hundred hands, but inhabitants 
of the village of Hekatoncheiria in Upper Macedonia, who 
warred with the inhabitants of Mount Olympus against the 
Titans: Scylla, whom Odysseus so narrowly escaped, was a fast- 





been done in former times (he affirms), they would continue to be done now; 
as they cannot be done nciw, we may be sure that they never were really done 
formerly (Minucius Felix, Octay. c. 20): “ Majoribus enim nostris tam facilis 
in mendaciis fides fuit, ut temeré crediderint etiam alia monstruosa mira 
miracula, Scyllam multiplicem, Chimeram multiformem, Hydram, et Cen- 
tauros. Quid illas aniles fabulas —de hominibus aves, et feras homines, et 
de hominibus arbores atque flores? Que, si essent facta, fierent ; quia fiers 
non possunt, ideo nec facta sunt.” 


MYTHES AS HANDLED BY THE PHILOSOPHERS. 417 


sailing piratical vessel, as was also Pegasus, the alleged winged 
horse of Belleroph6n.! 

By such ingenious conjectures, Palephatus eliminates all the 
incredible circumstances, and leaves to us a string of tales per- 
fectly credible and commonplace, which we should readily believe, 
provided a very moderate amount of testimony could be pro- 
duced in their favor. If his treatment not only disenchants the 
original mythes, but even effaces their generic and essential char- 
acter, we ought to remember that this is not more than what is 
done by Thucydidés in his sketch of the Trojanwar. Palepha- 
tus handles the mythes consistently, according to the semi-his- 
torical theory, and his results exhibit the maximum which that 
theory can ever present. By aid of conjecture, we get out of the 
impossible, and arrive at matters intrinsically plausible, but to- 





1 Palephat. Narrat. 1, 3, 6, 13, 20,21, 29. Two short treatises on the same 
subject as this of Palephatus, are printed along with it, both in the collection 
of Gale and of Westermann; the one, Heracliti de Incredibilibus, the other 
Anonymi de Incredibilibus. 'They both profess to interpret some of the extra- 
ordinary or miraculous mythes, and proceed in a track not unlike that of 
Palephatus. Scylla was a beautiful courtezan, surrounded with abominable 
parasites: she ensnared and ruined the companions of Odysseus, though he 
himself was prudent enough to escape her (Heraclit. c. 2. p. 313, West.) 
Atlas was a great astronomer: Pasiphaé fell in love with a youth named 
Taurus; the monster called the Chimera was in reality a ferocious queen, 
who had two brothers called Leo and Drako; the ram which carried Phryxus 
and Hellé across the Aigean was a boatman named Krias (Heraclit. c. 2, 6. 
15, 24). 

A great number of similar explanations are scattered throughout the 
Scholia on Homer and the Commentary of Eustathius, without specification 
of their authors. 

Theén considers such resolution of fable into plausible history as a proof 
of surpassing ingenuity (Progymnasmata, cap. 6, ap. Walz. Coll. Rhett 
Gree. i. p. 219). Others among the Rhetors, too, exercised their talents 
sometimes in vindicating, sometimes in controverting, the probability of the 
ancient mythes. See the. Progymnasmata of Nicolaus —Karackev7 dre 
elxéra Ta Kata NuoByv ’Avackevy bt obx eixéta Ta Kata Nvdfyv (ap. Walz. 
Coll. Rhetor. i. p. 284-318), where there are many specimens of this fanciful 
mode of handling. ; 

Plutarch, however, in one of his treatises, accepts Minotaurs, Sphinxes, 
Centaurs, etc. as realities; he treats them as products of the monstrous, 
mcestuous, and ungovernable lusts of man, which he contrasts with thé 
simple and moderate passions of animals (Plutarch, Gryllus, p. 990) 

VOL. I. 18* , 27oc 


418 HISTORY OF GREECE 


tally uncertified; beyond this point we cannot penetrate, without 
the light of extrinsic evidence, since there is no intrinsic mark te 
distinguish truth from plausible fiction.1 

It remains that we should notice the manner in which the an- 
cient mythes were received and dealt with by the philosophers. 
The earliest expression which we hear, on the part of philosophy, 
is the severe censure bestowed upon them on ethical grounds by 
Xenophanés of Kolophén, and seemingly by some others of his 
contemporaries.2. It was apparently in reply to such charges, 
which did not admit of being directly rebutted, that Theagenés 
of Rhégium (about 520 8. c.) first started the idea of a double 
meaning in the Homeric and Hesiodic narratives, — an interior 
sense, different from that which the words in their obvious mean- 
ing bore, yet to a certain extent analogous, and discoverable by 
sagacious divination. Upon this principle, he allegorized espe- 
cially the battle of the gods in the Iliad.2 In the succeeding cen- 





? The learned Mr. Jacob Bryant regards the explanations of Palephatus as 
if they wure founded upon real fact. Ile admits, for example, the city Ne 
phelé alleged by that author in his exposition of the fable of the Centaurs. 
Moreover, he speaks with much commendation of Palephatus generally: 
“ He (Palzphatus) wrote early, and seems to have been a serious and sen- 
sible person; one who saw the absurdity of the fables upon which the 
theology of his country was founded.” (Ancient Mythology, vol. i. p. 411- 
435.) 

So also Sir Thomas Brown (Enquiry into Vulgar Errors, Book I. chap. 
Vi. p. 221, ed. 1835) alludes to Palephatus as having incontestably pointed 
out the real basis of the fables. “And surely the fabulous inclination of 
those days was greater than any since; which swarmed so with fables, and 
from such slender grounds took hints for fictions, poisoning the world ever 
after: wherein how far they succeeded, may be exemplified from Peleg 
tus, in his Book of Fabulous Narrations.” 

2 Xenophan. ap. Sext. Empir. adv. Mathemat. ix. 193. He also disap- 
proved of the rites, accompanied by mourning and wailing, with which the 
Eleatés worshipped Leukothea: he told them, ei uév Yedv troAcuBavovar, 
LH Spnveiv> el 08 dvIpwrorv, pi Svecv (Aristotel. Rhet. ii. 23). 

Xenophanés pronounced the battles of the Titans, Gigantes, and Centaurs 
to be “ fictions of our predecessors,” sAdoyata tév mpotépwv (Xenophan. 
Fragm. 1. p. 42, ed. Schneidewin). 

See a curious comparison of the Grecian and Roman theology in Dicnys, 
Halicarn. Ant. Rom. ii. 20. 

? Schol. Iliad. xx. 67: Tatian. adv. Gree. c.48. Hérakleitus indignantly 
repelled the impudent atheists who found fault with the divine mythes of the 





ALLEGORIZING TENDENCY. 419 


tury, Anaxagoras and Metrodérus carried out the allegorical ex 
planation more comprehensively and systematically ; the former 
representing the mythical personages as mere mental conceptions, 
invested with name and gender, and illustrative of ethical pre- 
cepts, — the latter connecting them with physical principles and 
phenomena. Metrodorus resolved not only the persons of Zeus, 
Heéré,and Athéné, but also those of Agamemnon, Achilles, and Hee- 
tor, into various elemental combinations and physical agencies, and 
treated the adventures ascribed to them as natural facts concealed 
under the veil of allegory.!. Empedoklés, Prodikus, Antisthenés, 
Parmenidés, Hérakleidés of Pontus, and in a later age, Chrysip- 
pus, and the Stoic philosophers generally,? followed more or less 





Iliad, ignorant of their true allegorical meaning: 7 tév éxtovopévwv TO 
‘Ounpy téAua rode “Hpac decode aitidrat, kal vouilovorw tAnv ziva dapi27n 
tie adéov xpdc “Ounpov éyetv paviag tadita—'H od péuvy bre 7° expéuo 
ipoter, ete. AéAnTe O° abtode Ste TobTaLg Toig Exeowy éxteeordyntat h Tod 
mavro¢ yéveoic, Kal TA ouvexGo Gddueva Técoapa oToLYyeia TObTWY THY OTixwD 
éori tragic (Schol. ad Hom. Iliad, xv. 18). 

1 Diogen. Laért. ii, 11; Tatian. adv. Gree. c. 37; Hesychius, v. ’Ayapéu- 
vova. See the ethical turn given to the stories of Circé, the Sirens, and 
Scylla, in Xenoph. Memorab. i. 3, 7; ii. 6, 11-51. Syncellus, Chronic. p. 
149. ‘Epunvetovar dé of ’Avasayépetot Tod¢ pvdddere Geode, vodv uév Tov Aia, 
Tv 08 "AInvay téxvnyr, ete. 

Uschold and other modern German authors seem to have adopted in its 
full extent the principle of interpretation proposed by Metrodorus — treat- 
ing Odysseus and Penelopé as personifications of the Sun and Moon, etc 
See Helbig, Die Sittlichen Zustiinde des Griechischen Helden Alters, Einlei 
tung, p. xxix. (Leipzig, 1839.) 

Corrections of the Homeric text were also resorted to, in order to escape 
the necessity of imputing falsehood to Zeus (Aristotel. De Sophist. Elench. 
c. 4). 

SSE Empiric. ix. 18; Diogen. viii. 76; Plutarch, De Placit. Philo- 
soph. i. 3-6 ; De Poesi Homericd, 92-126; De Stoicor. Repugn. p. 1050, 
Menander, De Encomiis, ¢c. 5. 

Cicero, De Nat. Deor. i. 14, 15, 16,41; ii. 24-25. “Physica ratio non 
inelegans inclusa in impias fabulas.” 

In the Bacche of Euripidés, Pentheus is made to deride the tale of the 
motherless infant Dionysus having been sewn into the thigh of Zeus. Tei- 
resias, while reproving him for his impiety, explains the story away in a sort 
of allegory : the ynpd¢ Acdg (he says) was a mistaken statement in place of 
the aldip xI6va éyxvKAobpevog (Bacch 235-290). 

Lucretius (iii. 995-1036) allegorizes the conspicuous sufferers in Hadés, — 
Tantalus, Sisyphus, Tityus, and the Danatds, as well as the ministers of 


420 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


the same principle of treating the popular gods as allegorical per. 
sonages ; while the expositors of Homer (such as Stesimbrotus, 
Glauk6n, and others, even down to the Alexandrine age), though 
none of them proceeded to the same extreme length as Metrodé- 
rus, employed allegory amongst other media of explanation for 
the purpose of solving difficulties, or eluding reproaches against 
the poet. 

In the days of Plato and Zenophon, this allegorizing interpre- 
tation was one of the received methods of softening down the ob- 
noxious mythes —though Plato himself treated it as an insuffi- 
cient defence, seeing that the bulk of youthful hearers could not 
see through the allegory, but embraced the story literally as it 
was set forth! Pausanias tells us, that when he first began to 
write his work, he treated many of the Greek legends as silly and 
undeserving of serious attention; but as he proceeded, he gradu- 
ally arrived at the full conviction, that the ancient sages had de- 
signedly spoken in enigmatical language, and that there was val- 
uable truth wrapped up in their narratives: it was the duty of a 
pious man, therefore, to study and interpret, but not to reject, 





penal infliction, Cerberus and the Furies. The first four are emblematic 
descriptions of various defective or vicious characters in human nature, — 
the deisidsemonic, the ambitious, the amorous, or the insatiate and querulous 
man; the last two represent the mental terrors of the wicked. 

1 Oi viv rept “Ounpor dscvoi —so Plato calls these interpreters (Kratylus, 
p- 407); see also Xenoph. Sympos. iii. 6; Plato, Ion. p. 530; Plutarch, De 
Audiend. Poet. p. 19. dzévora was the original word, afterwards succeeded 
by GdAAnyopia. 

“Hpac d& decpode kai ‘Hoaiorov pierce td rarpic, wéAAovtog TH uNnTpl TUT- 
rouévy amovveiv, kat Scouaxiac bcac “Ouepog Twexoinkev, ob mapadexréov ei¢ 
Thy Tid, ob év brovotate TeTOLnpévag, obr dvev brovol- 
Sv. *O yap véog oby’ oldg te Kpivey 6,7t Te drévora Kat 6 ph, GAN a dr 
thatkovtoc Ov AGBy év rai¢ défatc, dvoéKvinTa Te Kal GueTdoTaTa dtAet yty- 
veodat (Plato, Republ. ii. 17. p. 378). 

The idea of an interior sense and concealed purpose in the ancient poets 
occurs several times in Plato (Thestet. c. 98. p. 180): mapa nev TOv dpyaiar, 
peta roujoewg éxixpuyrtopévwv Tod¢ moAAode, etc.; also Protagor. c. 20. p. 
316. 

* Modo Stoicum Homerum faciunt, — modo Epicureum, — modo Peripa- 
teticum,— modo Academicum. Apparat nihil horum esse in illo, quia 
omnia sunt.” (Seneca, Ep. 88.) Compare Plutarch, De Defectu Oracul. ¢ 
"1-12. t. ii. p. 702, Wytt., and Julian, Orat. vii. p. 216. 


EEE —— Sl 


PAUSANIAS AND HIS VIEW OF THE MYTHES. 421 


storics current and accredited respecting the gods.1 And others, 
— arguing from the analogy of the religious mysteries, which could 
not be divulged without impiety to any except such as had been 
specially admitted and initiated, — maintained that it would be a 
profanation to reveal directly to the vulgar, the genuine scheme 
of nature and the divine administration: the ancient poets and 
philosophers had taken the only proper course, of talking to the 
many in types and parables, and reserving the naked truth for 
privileged and qualified intelligences.2 The allegorical mode of 
explaining the ancient fables? became more and more popular in 





! Pausan. viii. 8,2. To the same purpose (Strabo, x. p. 474), allegory is 
admitted to a certain extent in the fables by Dionys. Halic. Ant. Rom. ii. 20. 
The fragment of the lost treatise of Plutarch, on the Platzan festival of the 
Deedala, is very instructive respecting Grecian allegory (Fragm. ix. t. 5. p. 
754-763, ed. Wyt.; ap. Euseb. Preepar. Evang. iii. 1). 

* This doctrine is set forth in Macrobius (i. 2). He distinguishes between 
fabula and fubulosa narratio: the former is fiction pure, intended either to 
amuse or to instruct—the latter is founded upon truth, either respecting 
human or respecting divine agency. The gods did not like to be publicly 
talked of (according to his view) except under the respectful veil of a fabl2 
(the same feeling as. that of Herodotus, which led him to refrain from insert- 
ing the lepot Adyoz in his history). The supreme god, the réyaddv, the 
mp@rov airtov, could not be talked of in fables: but the other gods, the aéria. 
or ethereal powers and the soul, might be, and ought to be, talked of in that 
manner alone. Only superior intellects ought to be admitted to a knowledge 
of the secret reality. “ De Diis ceteris, et de anima, non frustra se, nec ut 
oblectent, ad fabulosa convertunt; sed quia sciunt znimicam esse nature aper- 
tam nudamque expositionem sui: que sicut vulgaribus sensibus hominum 
intellectum sui, vario rerum tegmine operimentoque, subtraxit; ita 4 pru 
dentibus arcana sua voluit per fabulosa tractari......Adeo semper ita se et 
sciri et coli numina maluerunt, qualiter in vulgus antiquitus fabulata est. 
a 1 . Secundum hse Pythagoras ipse atque Empedocles, Parmenides quo- 
que et Heraclides, de Diis fabulati sunt: necsecus Timzus.” Compare also 
Maximus Tyrius, Dissert. x. and xxxii. Arnobius exposes the allegorical 
interpretation as mere evasion, and holds the Pagans to literal historical fact 
(Ady. Gentes, v. p. 185, ed. Elm.). 

Respecting the allegorical interpretation applied to the Greek fables, 
Bottiger (Die Kunst— Mythologie der Griechen, Abschn. ii. p. 176)> 
Nitzsch (Heldensage der Griech. sect. 6. p. 78); Lobeck (Aglaopham. p. 
133-155). 

3 According to the anonymous writer ap. Westermann (Script. Myth. p, 
328), every personal or denominated god may be construed in three different 
ways: either 7pa)yarikdc (historically, as having been a king or a man)— 


422 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


the third and fourth centuries after the Christian wera, especially 
among the new Platonic philosophers; being both congenial ta 





pr wuylxGc, in which theory Héré signifies the soul; Athéné, prudence ; 
Aphrodité, desire ; Zeus, mind, etc. — or ororyevaxd¢, in which system Apollo 
signifies the sun ; Poseid6n, the sea; Héré, the upper stratum of the air, or 
ether ; Athéné, the lower or denser stratum; Zeus, the upper hemisphere ; 
Kronus, the lower, etc. This writer thinks that all the three principles of 
construction may be resorted to, each on its proper occasion, and that neither 
of them excludes the others. It will be seen that the first is pure Euemer- 
ism ; the two latter are modes of allegory. 

The allegorical construction of the gods and of the divine mythes is copi- 
ously applied in the treatises, both of Phurnutus and Sallustius, in Gale’s 
collection of mythological writers.. Sallustius treats the mythes as of divine 
origin, and the chief poets as inspired (SedAnmror): the gods were propitious 
to those who recounted worthy and creditable mythes respecting them, and 
Sallustius prays that they will accept-with favor his own remarks (cap. 3 
and 4. pp. 245-251, Gale). He distributes mythes into five classes; theo- 
logical, physical, spiritual, material, and mixed. He defends the practice of 
speaking of the gods under the veil of allegory, much in the same way as 
Macrobius (in the preceding note): he finds, moreover, a good excuse even 
for those mythes which imputed to the gods theft, adultery, outrages towards 
a father, and other enormities: such tales (he says) were eminently suitable, 
since the mind must at once see that the facts as told are not to be taken as 
being themselves the real truth, but simply as a veil, disguising some interior 
truth (p. 247). 

Besides the Life of Homer ascribed to Plutarch (see Gale, p. 325-332), 
Héraclidés (not Héraclidés of Pontus) carries out the process of allegorizing 
the Homeric mythes most earnestly and most systematically. The applica- 
tion of the allegorizing theory is, in his view, the only way of reseuing 
Homer from the charge of scandalous impiety —aévty yap hoéBnoev, et 
pndév nAAnyopacev (Hérac. in init. p. 407, Gale). He proves at length, that 
the destructive arrows of Apollo, in the first book of the Iliad, mean nothing 
at the bottom except a contagious plague, caused by the heat of the summer 
sun in marshy ground (pp. 416-424). Athéné, who darts down from Olym- 
pus at the moment when Achilles is about to draw his sword on Agamem- 
non, and seizes him by the hair, is a personification of repentant prudence 
(p. 435). The conspiracy against Zeus, which Homer (Iliad, i. 400) relates 
io have been formed by the Olympic gods, and defeated by the timely aid of 
Thetis and Briareus — the chains and suspension imposed upon Héré— the 
xasting of Héphestos by Zeus out of Olympus, and his fall in Lémnus — 
the destruction of the Grecian wall by Poseidén, after the departure of the 
Greeks — the amorous scene between Zeus and Héré on Mount Gargarus — 
the distribution of the universe between Zeus, Poseidén, and Hadés— all 
these he resolves into peculiar manifestations and conflicts of the elemental 
substances in nature. To the much-decried battle of the gods, he gives a 


LATER PLATUNIC PHILOSOPHERS. 424 


their orientalized turn of thought, and useful as a shield against 
the attacks of the Christians. 

It was from the same strong necessity, of accommodating the 
old mythes to a new standard both of belief and of appreciation, 
that both the historical and the allegorical schemes of transform- 
ing them arose; the literal narrative being decomposed for the 
purpose of arriving at a base either of particular matter of fact, 





turn partly physical, partly ethical (p. 481). In like manner, he transforms 
and vindicates the adventures of the gods in the Odyssey: the wanderings 
of Odysseus, together with the Lotophagi, the Cyclops, Circé, the Sirens, 
£olus, Scylla, etc., he resolves into a series of temptations, imposed as a 
trial upon aman of wisdom and virtue, and emblematic of human life (p. 
496). The story of Arés, Aphrodité, and Héphzestos, in the eighth book of 
the Odyssey, seems to perplex him more than any other: he offers two 
explanations, neither of which seems satisfactory even to himself (p. 494). 

An anonymous writer in the collection of Westermann (pp. 329-344) has 
discussed the wanderings of Odysseus upon the same ethical scheme of in- 
terpretation as Héraclidés: he entitles his treatise “A short essay on the 
Wanderings of Odysseus in Homer, worked out in conjunction with ethical 
reflections, and rectifying what is rotten in the story, as well as may be, for 
the benefit of readers.” (7d pitov cadpdv Bepareiovea.) The author 
resolves the adventures of Odysseus into narratives emblematic of different 
situations and trials of human life. Scyllaand Charybdis, for example (c. &. 
p- 338), represent, the one, the infirmities and temptations arising out of the 
body, the other, those springing from the mind, between which man is called 
upon tosteer. The adventure of Odysseus with AZolus, shows how little good 
a virtuous man does himself by seeking, in case of distress, aid from conjurors 
and evil enchanters ; the assistance of suah allies, however it may at first 
promise well, ultimately deceives the person who accepts it, and renders him 
worse off than he was before (c. 3. p. 332). By such illustrations does the 
author sustain his general position, that there is a great body of valuable 
ethical teaching wrapped up in the poetry of Homer. 

Proclus is full of similar allegorization, both of Homer and Hesiod: the 
third Excursus of Heyne ad Iliad. xxiii. (vol. viii. p. 563), De Allegoria 
Homerica, contains a valuable summary of the general subject. 

The treatise De Astrologia, printed among the works of Lucian, contains 
specimens of astrological explanations applied to many of the Grecian 
uvot, which the author as a pious man cannot accept in their literal mean- 
ing. “How does it consist with holiness (he asks) to belicve that /Eneas 
was son of Aphrodité, Minds of Zeus, or Askalaphus of Mars? No; these 
wera men born under the favorable influences of the planets Venus, Jupiter, 
anil Mars.” He considers the principle cf astrological explanation peculiarly 
fit to be applied to the mythes of Homer and Hesiod (Lucian, De Astrologia, 

21-22). 


424 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


or of general physical or moral truth. Instructed men were 
commonly disposed to historicize only the heroic legends, and to 
allegorize more or less of the divine legends: the attempt of 
Euémerus to historicize the latter was for the most part denounced 
as irreligious, while that of Metrodorus to allegorize the former 
met with no success. In allegorizing, moreover, even the divine 
legends, it was usual to apply the scheme of allegory only to the 
inferior gods, though some of the great Stoic philosophers car- 
ried it farther, and allegorized all the separate personal gods, 
leaving only an all-pervading cosmic Mind,! essential as a co- 
efficient along with Matter, yet not separable from Matter. But 
many pious pagans seem to have perceived that allegory pushed 
to this extent was fatal to all living religious faith,? inasmuch as 
it divested the gods of their character of Persons, sympathizing 
with mankind and modifiable in their dispositions according to 
the conduct and prayers of the believer: and hence they per- 
mitted themselves to employ allegorical interpretation only to 
some of the obnoxious legends connected with the superior gods, 
leaving the personality of the latter unimpeached. 

One novelty, however, introduced seemingly by the philosopher 
Empedoklés and afterwards expanded by others, deserves notice, 
inasmuch as it modified considerably the old religious creed by 
drawing a pointed contrast between gods and demons, — a dis- 
tinction hardly at all manifested in Homer, but recognized in the 
Works and Days of Hesiod.3 Empedoklés widened the gap be- 
tween the two, and founded upon it important consequences. The 
gods were good, immortal, and powerful agents, having freewill 





1 See Ritter, Geschichte der Philosophie, 2nd edit. part 3. book 11. chap. 4. 
p. 592; Varro ap. Augustin. Civitat. Dei, vi. 5,ix. 6; Cicero, Nat. Deor. ii. 
24-28. 

Chrysippus admitted the most important distinction between Zeus and the 
other gods (Plutarch. de Stoicor. Repugnant. p. 1052.) 

2 Plutarch. de Isid. et Osirid. c. 66. p. 377; c. 70. p. 3879. Compare on 
this subject O. Miiller, Prolegom. Mythol. P- 59 seq., and ince Lehr 
buch der Religions Geschichte, vol. i. sect. ii. p. 46. 

3 Hesiod, Opp. et Di. 122: to the same effect Pythagoras sai Thalés 
(2Yogen. Laér. viii. 32; and Plutarch, Placit. Philos. i. 8). 

The Hesiodic aerisbnd are all good: Athenagoras (Legat. Chr. p. 8) says 
that Thalés admitted a distinction between good and bad demers. wnich 
seems very doubtful. 








CHARACTER OF THE DEMONS. 425 


and intelligence, but without appetite, passion, or infirmity: the 
dzmons were of a mixed nature between gods and men, ministers 
and interpreters from the former to the latter, but invested also 
with an agency and dispositions of their own. They were very 
long-lived, but not immortal, and subject to the passions and pro- 
pensities of men, so that there were among them beneficent and 
maleficient demons with every shade of intermediate difference.!. 





The distinction between Oco? and Aaiuovec is especially set forth in the 
treatise of Plutarch, De Defectu Oraculorum, capp. 10, 12; 13, 15, ete. He 
seems to suppose it traceable to the doctrine of Zoroaster or the Orphic 
mysteries, and he represents it as relieving the philosopher from great per- 
plexities : for it was difficult to know where to draw the line in admitting or 
rejecting divine Providence: errors were committed sometimes in affirming 
God to be the cause of everything, at other times in supposing him to be the 
cause of nothing. ’Evel rd diopicar wag ypnoréov kat péxypt Tivwv TH Tpovoia, 
yarerdr, of piv obdevdg dxAG¢ Tov Fedv, ol d? duod Te ravTwy altiov Tot- 
abvrec, dotoxotar Tod pweTpiov Kal mpérovtoc. Ed piv ody Aéyovory ob Aé- 
yovrec, Ste WAdrwy 7d rai¢ yevvwpévate rordtnow troxeipevov orotxeiov 
éSevpdv, 5 viv bAnv Kat dbowv Kadovorv, TOAAGY arnAdase Kal peyGAwy dro- 
piav Tove dtAocigove* guol dé doxovar rAeiovag Avoca Kal peilovac amopiag ot 
Td tév daiuévev yévog év péow Sedv Kal avdpdrov, kai tpérov Tiva Thy 
xowvaviav juav civayov eig tabTd Kal cbvartov, éSevpdvtec (c. 10). ‘H dac- 
ubvav gbatc Exovoa Kai ado Svytod Kat Feod divauiy (c. 13). 

Eio? yap, o¢ év dv8parote, at daipooty dperic dtagopat, kal rod radnriKxod 
«at dAdyov Toic piv doevic Kal duavpdy Ert Aeixpavov, Sorep Tepitrwpa, Toi¢ 
Jt road cal dvoxaradcBeorov éveotiv, Ov ixvy Kal obuBoda roAAayod Siovat 
kal TeAetat kat pvdodoyias odfover cal diagvaarrovow évdceorappéva (ib.): 
compare Plutarch. de Isid. et Osir. 25. p. 360. 

Kat piv b0ac Evte pitore eal tuvorg Aé€yovot kat gdover, 
~ovTo piv dprayac, Todro di rAdvag Gedv, kpirpetc Te kat dvyd¢ Kat AaTpeiac, 
ob Sev eloiv dAAd Saruévev wadjpuara, ete. (c. 15): also c. 23; also De Isid. 
et Osir. c. 25. p. 366. 

Human sacrifices and other objectionable rites are excused, as necessary 
for the purpose of averting the anger of bad demons (¢. 14-15). 

Empedoklés is represented as the first author of the doctrine which im- 
puted vicious and abominable dispositions to many of the demons (ce. 15, 
16, 17, 20), tode eloayopévove ixd ’Euredoxiéove daipovac; expelled from 
heaven by the gods, #e7AarTor Kat obpavorerei¢ (Plutarch, De Vitand. Aér, 
Alien. p. 830) ; followed by Plato, Xenokratés, and Chrysippus, c. 17: com- 
pare Plato {Apolog. Socrat. p. 27; Politic. p. 271; Symposion, c. 28. p. 203), 
though he seems to treat the daiuovec as defective and mutable beings, rather 
than actively maleficent. Xenokratés represents some of them both as wick- 
ed and powerful ina high degree: — Zevoxparne kat rév fuepGv tag axe 


426 HISTORY OF GREECK. 


It had been the mistake (according to these philosophers) of the 
old mythes to ascribe to the gods proceedings really belonging to 
the demons, who were always the immediate communicants with 
mortal nature, inspiring prophetic power to the priestesses of the 
oracles, sending dreams and omens, and perpetually interfering 
either for good or for evil. The wicked and violent demons, 
having committed many enormities, had thus sometimes incurred 
punishment from the gods: besides which, their bad dispositiens 
had imposed upon men the necessity of appeasing them by reli- 
gious ceremonies of a kind acceptable to such beings: hence, the 
human sacrifices, the violent, cruel, and obscene exhibitions, the 
wailings and fastings, the tearing and eating of raw flesh, which 
it had become customary to practise on various consecrated occa~- 
sions, and especially in the Dionysiac solemnities. Moreover, the 
discreditable actions imputed to the gods, — the terrific combats, 
the Typhonic and Titanic convulsions, the rapes, abductions, flight, 
servitude, and concealment, — all these were really the doings and 
sufferings of bad demons, placed far below the sovereign agency 
—equable, undisturbed, and unpolluted — of the immortal gods. 
The action of such demons upon mankind was fitful and inter- 
mittent: they sometimes perished or changed their local abode, 
so that oracles which had once been inspired became after a time 
forsaken and disfranchized.! 

This distinction between gods and demons appeared to save 
in a great degree both the truch of the old legends and the dig- 





dpadac, kai Tv éopTay boat nAnyae Tivag }} KoTmeTOde, } vyoTetag, 7) dvodnpiac, 
}) aloxpodoyiav Exyovowv, otte Yedv tiuaic oite datudvey olerat mpooHKew 
XpnoTGy, GAN’ eivat dbcere év TH wepréyovrTt peyadAac uv Kai loyvpac, dvorpé- 
moug 6& kal oxvdpwrdc, al yaipovor roig ToLobvrorc, Kal TYY XG 
vovoalt Tpd¢ obVEiv GAO YeEtpoy TpérovTat (Plutarch, Ne Isid. 
ut Osir. c. 26. p. 361; Question. Rom. p. 283): compare Stobzeus, Eclog. 
Phys. i. p. 62. 

1 Plutarch, De Defect. Orac. c. 15. p. 418. Chrysippus admitted, among 
the various conceivable causes to account for the existence of evil, the suppo 
sition of some negligent and reckless demons, darudvia gavad év ol¢ tH bvre 
yivovrat kal éykAnréat a4pédecac (Platarch, De Stoicor. Reptgnant. p. 1051). 
A distinction, which I do not fully understand, between cot and daipzovec, 
was also adopted among the Locrians at Opus: daizwy with them seems to 
have been equivalent to #pw¢ (Plutarch, Question. Greece. ¢. 6. p. 292): see 
the note above, pp. 350-351. 








INTERPRETATION OF THE MYTHES. 427 


nity of the gods: it obviated the necessity of pronouncing either 
that the gods were unworthy, or the legends untrue. Yet although 
devised for the purpose of satisfying a more scrupulous religious 
sensibility, it was found inconvenient afterwards, when assailants 
arose against paganism generally. For while it abandoned as 
indefensible a large portion of what had once been genuine faith, 
it still retained the same word demons with an entirely altered 
signification. ‘The Christian writers in their controversies found 
ample warrant among the earlier pagan authors! for treating all 
the gods as demons — and not less ample warrant among the later 
pagans for denouncing the demons generally as evil beings.2 
Such were the different modes in ‘which the ancient mythes 
were treated, during the literary life of Greece, by the four classes 
above named — poets, logographers, historians, and philosophers. 
Literal acceptance, and unconscious, uninquiring faith, such as 
they had obtained from the original auditors to whom they were 
addressed, they now found only among the multitude —alike 
retentive of traditional feeling? and fearful of criticizing the pro- 





1 Tatian. ady. Grecos, c. 20; Clemens Alexandrin. Admonit. ad Gentes, 
pp- 26-29, Sylb.; Minuc. Felix, Octay. c, 26. “Istiigitur impuri spiritus, ut 
ostensum a Magis, a philosophis, a Platone, sub statuis et imaginibus conse- 
srati delitescunt, et afflatu suo quasi auctoritatem preesentis numinis conse- 
quuntur,” etc. This, like so many other of the aggressive arguments of the 
Christians against paganism, was taken from the pagan philosophers them 
selves. 

Lactantius, De Vera Philosophia, iv. 28. ‘Ergo iidem sunt Dxmones, 

10s fatentur execrandos esse: iidem Dii, quibus supplicant. Si nobis cre- 
d-ndum esse non putant, credant Homero; qui summum illum Jovem De- 
monibus aggregavit,” etc. 

2 See above, Chapter II. p. 70, the remarks on the Hesiodic Theogony. 

3 A destructive inundation took place at Pheneus in Arcadia, seemingly 
in ‘the time of Plutarch: the subterranean outlet (Gapadpov) of the river 
had become blocked up, and the inhabitants ascribed the stoppage to the 
anger of Apollo, who had been provoked by the stealing of the Pythian 
tripod by Héraklés: the latter had carried the tripod to Pheneus and de- 
posited it there. "Ap’ obv otx drom@repog TobTwv 6 'ArddAwv, ei Devedtag 
ardAavat trode viv, guppatac 7d Bapadpor, kal kataxAvoag Ty xopav Gracav 
abrdv, br. xpd xiAiwv Erwv, d¢ gacty, 6 ‘Hpaxdrje dvaoracag ~dv ipinoda 
rov pavtixdy eic Sevedv aaqveyxe; (Plutarch. de Serd Numin. Vindicta, 
p- 577; compare Pausan. viii. 14, 1.) The expression of Plutarch, that 
the abatraction of the tripod by Héraklés had taken place 1000 years 


428 HISTORY OF GREECE 


ceedings of the gods.! Bat with instructed men they became 
rather subjects of respectful and curious analysis — all agreeing 
that the Word as tendered to them was inadmissible, yet all equally 
convinced that it contained important meaning, though hidden 
yet not undiscoverable. A very large proportion of the force 
of Grecian intellect was engaged in searching after this unknown 
base, by guesses, in which sometimes the principle of semi-his 
torical interpretation was assumed, sometimes that of allegori 
cal, without any collateral evidence in either case, and without 
possibility of verification. Out of the one assumption grew a 
string of allegorized phenomenal truths, out of the other a long 
series of seeming historical events and chronological persons, — 
both elicited from the transformed mythes and from nothing 
else.? 





before, is that of the critic, who thinks it needful to historicize and chronol- 
ogize the genuine legend ; which, to an inhabitant of Pheneus, at the time of 
the inundation, was doubtless as little questioned as if the theft of Héraklés 
had been laid in the preceding generation. 

Agathoclés of Syracuse committed depredations on the coasts of Ithaca 
and Korkyra: the excuse which he offered was, that Odysseus had come to 
Sicily and blinded Polyphémus, and that on his return he had been kindly 
received by the Pheakians (Plutarch, 7.). 

This is doubtless a jest, either made by Agathoclés, or more probably in- 
vented for him ; but it is founded upon a popular belief. 

1 “ Sanctiusque et reverentius visum, de actis Deorum credere quam scire.” 
(Tacit. German, c. 34.) 

Aristidés, however, represents the Homeric theology (whether he weokid 
have included the Hesiodic we do not know) as believed quite literally among 
the multitude in his time, the second century after Christianity (Aristid. Orat, 
iii. p. 25). ’Amopd, dn mote xpn pe dvadécdar pe dudv, wétEepa Ge Toi¢ 
moAdoic doxet kat ‘Ounpy 62 ovvdoxei, Sev radjuara ovprerodivat Kal huac, 
olov ’Apéoc déopa kal ’ArbAAwvOG nreiac Kat ‘Hoaiorov pinpete ele VaAaccar, 
ottw dé kal 'Ivote ayn Kal dvyae twvac. “Compare Lucian, Zede Tpayddog, 
¢. 20, and De Luctu, c. 2; Dionys. Halicar. A. R. ii. p. 90, Sylb. 

Kallimachus (Hymn. ad Jov. 9) distinctly denied the statement of the 
Kretans that they possessed in Kréte the tomb of Zeus, and treated it as an 
instance of Kretan mendacity; while Celsus did not deny it, but explained 
it in some figurative manner — alvirrouevoc tpomexdg brovoiac (Origen. cont 
Celsum, iii. p. 137). 

* There is here a change as compared with my first edition; J had inserted 
here some remarks on the allegorical theory of interpretation, as compared 
with the semi-historical. An able article on my work (in the Edirburgh 





yer te Oe 


. 
SCHEME OF INTERPRETATION. 429 


fhe utmost which we accomplish by means of the semi-his 
terical theory, even in its most successful applications, is, that 
after leaving out from the mythical narrative all that is miracu- 
lous or high-colored or extravagant, we arrive at a series of credi- 
ble incidents — incidents which may, perhaps, have really occur 
red, and against which no intrinsic presumption can be raised. 
This is exactly the character of a well-written modern novel (as, 
for example, several among the compositions of Defoe), the whole 
story of which is such as may well have occurred in real life: it 
is plausible fiction, and nothing beyond. To raise plausible fic- 
tion up to the superior dignity of truth, some positive testimony 
or positive ground of inference must be shown; even the highest 
measure of intrinsic probability is not alone sufficient. A man 
who tells us that, on the day of the battle of Plateza, rain fell on 
the spot of ground where the city of New York now stands, will 
neither deserve nor obtain credit, because he can have had no 
means of positive knowledge; though the statement is not in the 
slightest degree improbable. On the other hand, statements in 
themselves very improbable may well deserve belief, provided 
they be supported by sufficient positive evidence; thus the canal 
dug by order of Xerxés across the promontory of Mount Athos, 
and the sailing of the Persian fleet through it, is a fact which 1 
believe, because it is well-attested — notwithstanding its remark- 
able improbability, which so far misled Juvenal as to induce him 
to single out the narrative as a glaring example of Grecian men- 
dacity.!' Again, many critics have observed that the general tale 
of the Trojan war (apart from the superhuman agencies) is not 
more improbable than that of the Crusades, which every one ad- 
mits to be an historical fact. But (even if we grant this position, 
which is only true to a small extent), it is not sufficient to show 
an analogy between the two cases in respect to negative presump- 
tions alone; the analogy ought to be shown to hold between them 





Review, October 1846), pointed out that those remarks required modification, 
and thatthe idea of allegory in reference to the construction of the mythts 
was altogether inadmissible. 
1 Juvenal, Sat. x. 174:— 
“ Creditur olim 
Velificatus Athos, et quantum Grecia mendax 
Audet in historid,” ete. 


. 


430 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


in respect to positive certificate also. The Crusades are a curious 
phenomenon in history, but we accept them, nevertheless, as an 
unquestionable fact, because the antecedent improbability is sur- 
mounted by adequate contemporary testimony. When the like 
testimony, both in amount and kind, is produced to establish the 
historical reality of a Trojan war, we shall not hesitate to deal 
with the two events on the same footing. 

In applying the semi-historical theory to Grecian mythical nar- 
rative, it has been often forgotten that a certain strength of testi- 
mony, or positive ground of belief, must first be tendered, before 
we can be called upon to discuss the antecedent probability or 
improbability of the incidents alleged. ‘The belief of the Greeks 
themselves, without the smallest aid of special or contemporary 
witnesses, has been tacitly assumed as sufficient to support the 
case, provided only sufficient deduction be made from the mythi- 
cal narratives to remove all antecedent improbabilities. It has 
been taken for granted that the faith of the people must have 
rested originally upon some particular historical event, involving 
the identical persons, things, and places which the original mythes 
exhibit, or at least the most prominent among them. But when 
we examine the pyschagogic influences predominant in the so- 
ciety among whom this belief originally grew up, we shall see 
that their belief is of little or no evidentiary value, and that the 
growth and diffusion of it may be satisfactorily explained without 
supposing any special basis of matters of fact. The popular 
faith, so far as it counts for anything, testifies in favor of the en- 
tire and literal mythes, which are now universally rejected as 
incredibe.! We have thus the very minimum of positive proof, 





' Colonel Sleeman observes, respecting the Hindoo historical mind — 
“History to this people is all a fairy tale.” (Rambles and Recollections of 
an Indian Official, vol. i. ch. ix. p. 70.) And again, “ The popular poem of 
the Ramaen describes the abduction of the heroiue by the monster king of 
Ceylon, Rawun; and her recovery by means of the monkey general, Hun- 
nooman. Every word of this poem, the people assured me was written, if 
not by the hand of the Deity himself, at least by his inspiration, which was 
the same thing — and it must consequently be true. Ninety-nine out of a 
hundred, among the Hindoos, implicitly believe, not only every word of the 
poem, but every word of every poem that has ever been written in Sanscrit. 
If you ask a man whether he really believes any very egregious absurdity 
quoted from these books, he replies, with the greatest notveté in the world, Is 


TRUTH UNDISTINGUISHABLE FROM FICTION. 43] 


and the maximum of negative presumption: we may diminish 
the latter by conjectural omissions and interpolations, but we can- 
not by any artifice increase the former: the narrative ceases to 
be incredible, but it still remains uncertified, —a mere common- 
place possibility. Nor is fiction always, or essentially, extrava- 
gant and incredible. It is often not only plausible and coherent. 
but even more like truth (if a paradoxical phrase may be allow- 
ed) than truth itself. Nor can we, in the absence of any extrin- 
sic test, reckon upon any intrinsic mark to discriminate the one 
from the other.! 





it not written in the book; and how should it be there written, if not true ? 
The Hindoo religion reposes upon an entire prostration of mind, — that 
continual and habitual surrender of the reasoning faculties, which we are 
accustomed to make occasionally, while engaged at the theatre, or in the 
perusal of works of fiction. We allow the scenes, characters, and incidents, 
to pass before our mind’s eye, and move our feelings — without stopping a 
moment to ask whether they are real or true. There is only this difference 
— that with people of education among us, even in such short intervals of, 
illusion or abandon, any extravagance in the acting, or flagrant improbability 
in the fiction, destroys the charm, breaks the spell by which we have been so 
mysteriously bound, and restores us to reason and the realities of ordinary 
life. With the Hindoos, on the contrary, the greater the improbability, the 
more monstrous and preposterous the fiction — the greater is the charm it 
has over their minds; and the greater their learning in the Sanscrit, the 
more are they under the influence of this charm. Believing all to be written 
by the Deity, or under his inspirations, and the men and things of former 
days to have been very different from men and things of the present day. 
and the heroes of these fables to have been demigods, or people endowed 
with powers far superior to those of the ordinary men of their own day — 
the analogies of nature are never for a moment considered ; nor do questions 
of probability, or possibility, according to those analogies, ever obtrude to 
dispel the charm with which they are so pleasingly bound. They go on 
through life reading and talking of these monstrous fictions, which shock 
the taste and understanding of other nations, without ever questioning ¢he 
truth of one single incident, or hearing it questioned. There was a tims, 
and that not far distant, when it was the same in England, and in every 
other European nation; and there are, I am afraid, some parts of Europe 
where it is so still. But the Hindoo faith, so far as religious questions are 
concerned, is not more capacious or absurd than that of the Greeks or Ro- 
mans in the days of Socrates or Cicero: the only difference is, that among . 
the Hindoos a greater number of the questions which interest mankind are 
brought under the head of religion.” (Sleeman, Rambles, etc., vol. i, ch, 
XXVi. p. 227: compare vol. ii. ch. v. p. 51; viii. p. 97.) 

1 Lord Lyttleton, in commenting on the tales of the Irish bards, in his 


432 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


In the semi-historical theory respecting Grecian mythical nar 
rative, the critic unconsciously transports into the Homeric age 
those habits of classification and distinction, and that standard of 
acceptance or rejection, which he finds current in his own. 
Amongst us, the distinction between historical fact and fiction is 
highly valued as well as familiarly understood: we have a long 
history of the past, deduced from a study of contemporary evi- 
dences; and we have a body of fictitious literature, stamped 
with its own mark and interesting in its own way. Speaking 
generally, no man could now hope to succeed permanently in 
transferring any striking incident from the latter category into 
the former, nor could any man deliberately attempt it without 
incurring well-merited obloquy. But this historical sense, now sa 
deeply rooted in the modern mind that we find a difficulty in con- 
ceiving any people to be without it, is the fruit of records and 
inquiries, first applied to the present, and then preserved and 
studied by subsequent generations; while in a society which has 
not yet formed the habit of recording its present, the real facts 
of the past can never be known; the difference between attested 





Hlistory of Henry IL., has the following just remarks (book iy. vol. iii. p. 13, 
quarto) : “‘ One may reasonably suppose that in MSS. written since the Irish 
received the Roman letters from St. Patrick, some traditional truths recorded 
before by the bards in their unwritten poems may have been preserved to our 
times. Yet these cannot be so separated from many fabulous stories derived 
from the same sources, as to obtain a firm credit; it not being sufficient to 
establish the authority of suspected traditions, that they can be shown not 
to be so improbable or absurd as others with which they are mixed —since 
there may be specious as well as senseless fictions. Nor can a poet or bard, 
who lived in the sixth or seventh century after Christ, if his poem is still 
extant, be any voucher for facts supposed to have happened before the in 
carnation; though his evidence (allowing for poetical license) may be 
received on such matters as come within his own time, or the remembrance 
of old men with whom he conversed. The most judicious historians pay no 
regard to the Welsh or British traditions delivered by Geoffrey of Monmouth, 
though it is not impossible but that some of these may be true.” 

One definition of a mythe given by Plutarch coincides exactly with a 
specrous fiction: ‘O pidoc elvar BobAerar Adyoc Wevdhe Zornde aAndiw@ (Plu- 
tarch, Bellone an pace clariores fuerunt Athenienses, p. 348). 

+ Der Grund-Trieb des Mythus (Creuzer justly expresses it) das Ge- 
dachte in ein Geschehenes umzusetzen.” (Symbolik der Alten Welt, sect. 
45. p. 99.) 





— 


SEMI HISTORICAL THEORY. 438 


matter of fact and plausible fiction — between truth and that 
which is like truth —can neither be discerned nor sought for. 
Yet it is precisely upon the supposition that this distinction is 
present to men’s habitual thoughts, that the semi-historical theory 
of the mythes is grounded. 

It is perfectly true, as has often been stated, that the Grecian 
epic contains what are called traditions respecting the past — the 
larger portion of it, indeed, consists of nothing else. But what 
are these traditions? They are the matter of those songs and 
stories which have acquired hold on the public mind; they are 
the creations of the poets and storytellers themselves, each of 
whom finds some’ preéxisting, and adds others of his own, new 
und previously untold, under the impulse and authority of the 
inspiring Muse. Homer doubtless found many songs and stories 
current with respect to the siege of Troy; he received and trans- 
mitted some of these traditions, recast and transformed others, 
and enlarged the whole mass by new creations of his own. To 
the subsequent poets, such as Arktinus and Leschés, these Ho- 
meric creations formed portions of preéxisting tradition, with 
which they dealt in the same manner; so that the whole mass of 
traditions constituting the tale of Troy became larger and larger 
rith each successive contributor. To assume a generic differ- 
x.ce between the older and the newer strata of tradition — to 
reat the former as morsels of history, and the latter as appen- 
lages of fiction —is an hypothesis gratuitous at the least, not to 
say inadmissible. For the further we travel back into the past, 
she more do we recede from the clear day of positive history, 
and the deeper do we plunge into the unsteady twilight and 
gorgeous clouds of fancy and feeling. It was one of the agree- 


able dreams of the Grecian epic, that the man who travelled far 


2nough northward beyond the Rhipzan mountains, would in time 
reach the delicious country and genial climate of the virtuous 
Hyperboreans — the votaries and favorites of Apollo, who dwelt 
in the extreme north beyond the chilling blasts of Boreas. Now 
the hope that we may, by carrying our researches up the stream 
of time, exhaust the limits of fiction, and land ultimately upon 
some points of solid truth, appears to me no less illusory than 
his northward journey in quest of the Hyperborean elysium. 
FOL. I. 19 280c. 


434 HISTORY OF GREECE.’ 


The general disposition to adopt the semi-historical theory as 
to the genesis of Grecian mythes, arises in part from reluctance 
in critics to impute to the mythopeeic ages extreme credulity or 
fraud; together with the usual presumption, that where much is 
believed some portion of it must be true... There would be some 
weight in these grounds of reasoning, if the ages under discus- 
sion had been supplied with records and accustomed to critical 
inquiry. But amongst a people unprovided with the former and 
strangers to the latter, credulity is naturally at its maximum, as 
well in the narrator himself as in his hearers: the idea of delib- 
erate fraud is moreover inapplicable, for if the hearers are dis- 
posed to accept what is related to them as a revelation from the 
Muse, the estrus of composition is quite sufficient to impart a 
similar persuasion to the poet whose mind is penetrated with it. 
The belief of that day can hardly be said to stand apart by itself 
as an act of reason. It becomes confounded with, vivacious im- 
agination and earnest emotion; and in every case where these 
mental excitabilities are powerfully acted upon, faith ensues un- 
consciously and as a matter of course., How active and, promi- 
nent such tendencies were among the early Greeks, the extraor- 
dinary beauty and originality of their epic poetry may teach us. 

It is, besides, a presumption far too largely and indiscriminately 
applied, even in our own advanced age, that where much is be- 
lieved, something must necessarily be true—that accredited 
fiction is always traceable tosome basis of historical truth? The 





‘In reference to the loose statements of the Highlanders, Dr. Johnson ob- 
serves, “He that goes into the Highlands with a mind naturally acquies- 
cent, and a credulity eager for wonders, may perhaps come back with an 
opinion very different from. mine ; for the inhabitants, knowing the ignorance 
of all strangers in their language and antiquities, are perhaps not yery scru- 
pulous adherents to truth; yet I do not say that they deliberately speak stud- 
ied falsehood, or have a settled purpose,to deceive. They have acquired and 
considered little, and do not always feel their own ignorance. They are not 
much accustomed to be interrogated by others, and seem never to have thought 
of interrogating themselves ; so that tf they do not know what they tell to betrue, 
they likewise do not distinctly perceive it to be false. Mr. Boswell was very dili- 
gent in his inquiries, and the result of his investigations was, that the answer 
to the second question was commonly such as nullified the answer to the 
first.” (Journey to the Western Islands, p. 272, Ist edit., 1775). 

*I considered this position more at large in an article in the * Westminster 








PLAUSIBLE FICTION, HOW GENERATED 438 


influence of imagination and feeling is not confined simply to the 
process of retouching, transforming, or magnifying narratives 
originally founded on fact ; it will often create new narratives of 
its own, without any such preliminary basis. Where there is any 
general body of sentiment pervading men living in society, whether 
it be religious or political— love, admiration, or antipathy —all 
incidents tending to illustrate that sentiment are eagerly wel- 
comed, rapidly circulated and (as a general rule) easily accréd- 
ited. If real incidents are not at hand, impressive fictions will 
be provided to satisfy the demand. The perfect harmony of such 
fictions with the prevalent feeling stands in the place of certi- 
fying testimony, and causes men to hear them not merely with 
credence, but even with delight: to call them in question and 
require proof, is a task which cannot be undertaken without in- 
curring obloquy. Of such tendencies in the human mind, abun- 
dant evidence is furnished by the innumerable religious legends 
which have acquired currency in various parts of the world, and 
of which no country was more fertile than Greece — legends 
which derived their origin, not from special facts misreported and 
exaggerated, but from pious feelings pervading the society, and 
translated into narrative by forward and imaginative minds — 
legends, in which not merely the incidents, but often even the 
personages are unreal, yet in which the generating sentiment is 
conspicuously discernible, providing its own matter as well as its 
own form. Other sentiments also, as well as the religious, pro- 
vided they be fervent and widely diffused, will find expression in 
current narrative, and become portions of the general public be- 
lief — every celebrated and notorious character is the source of 
a thcusand fictions exemplifying his peculiarities. And if it be 
true, as I think present observation may show us, that such crea- 
tive agencies are even now visible and effective, when the mate- 
rials of genuine history are copious and critically studied —much 
more are we warranted in concluding that, in ages destitute of 
records, strangers to historical testimony, and full of belief in 
divine inspiration. both as to the future and as to the past, narra 
tives purely fictitious will acquire ready and uninquiring credence, 





Review” for May, 1843, on Niebuhr’s Greek Legends, with which article 
much in the present chapter will be found to coincide. 


436 HISTORY OF GREECE 


provided only they be plausible and in harmony with tle precon- 
ceptions of the auditors. 

The allegorical interpretation of the mythes has been by seve- 
ral learned investigators, especially by Creuzer, connected with — 
the hypothesis of an ancient and highly instructed body of priests, 
having their origin either in Egypt or in the East, and communi- 
cating to the rude and barbarous Greeks religious, physical, and 
historical knowledge under the veil of symbols. At a time (we 
are told) when language was yet in its infancy, visible symbols 
were the most vivid means of acting upon the minds of ignorant 
hearers: the next step was to pass to symbolical language and 
expressions — for a plain and literal exposition, even if understood 
at all, would at least have been listened to with indifference, as 
not corresponding with any mental demand. In such allegoriz 
ing way, then, the early priests set forth their doctrines respect- 
ing God, nature, and humanity—a refined monotheism and a 
theological philosophy — and to this purpose the earliest mythes 
were turned. But another class of mythes, more popular and 
more captivating, grew up under the hands of the poets — mythes 
purely epical, and descriptive of real or supposed past events. 
The allegorical mythes, being taken up by the poets, insensibly 
became confounded in the same category with the purely narra- 
tive mythes—the matter symbolized was no longer thought of, 
while the symbolizing words came to be construed in their own 
literal meaning —and the basis of the early allegory, thus lost 
among the general public, was only preserved as a secret among 
various religious fraternities, composed of members allied together 
by initiation in certain mystical ceremonies, and administered by 
hereditary families of presiding priests. In the Orphie and Bac- 
chic sects, in the Eleusinian and Samothracian mysteries, was 
thus treasured up the secret doctrine of the old theological and 
philosophical mythes, which had once constituted the primitive 
legendary stock of Greece, in the hands of the original priest- 
hood and in ages anterior to Homer. Persons who had gone 
through the preliminary ceremonies of initiation, were permitted 
at length to hear, though under strict obligation of secrecy, this 
ancient religious and cosmogonic doctrine, revealing the destina- 
tion of man and the certainty of posthumous rewards and pwnish- 


THEORIES OF LEARNED MEN. 437 


ments — all disengaged from the corruptions of poets, as well as 
from the symbols and allegories under which they still remained 
buried in the eyes of the vulgar. The mysteries of Greece were 


' thus traced up to the earliest ages, and represented as the only 


faithful depository channels of that purer theology and physics 
which had originally been communicated, though under the 
unavoidable inconvenience of a symbolical expression, by an 
enlightened priesthood coming from abroad to the then rude 
barbarians of the country.! 





? For this general character of the Grecian mysteries, with their concealed 
treasure of doctrine, see Warburton, Divine Legation of Moses, book ii. sect. 4. 

Payne Knight, On the Symbolical Language of ancient Art and Mytholo- 
gy, sect. 6, 10, 11, 40, ete. 

Saint Croix, Recherches sur les Mystéres du Paganisme, sect. 3, p. 106; 
sect 4, p. 404, etc. 

Creuzer, Symbolik und Mythologie der Alten Volker, sect. 2, 3, 23, 39, 
42, etc. Meiners and Heeren adopt generally the same view, though there 
are many divergences of opinion between these different authors, on a sub- 
ject essentially obscure. Warburton maintained that the interior doctrine 
communicated in the mysteries was the existence of one Supreme Divinity, 
combined with the Euemeristic creed, that the pagan gods had been mere 
men. 

See Clemens Alex. Strom. v. p. 582, Sylb. 

The view taken by Hermann of the ancient Greek mythology is in many 
points similar to that of Creuzer, though with some considerable difference. 
He thinks that it is an aggregate of doctrine — philosophical, theological, 
physical, and moral— expressed under a scheme of systematic personifica- 
tions, each person being called by a name significant of the function personi- 
fied: this doctrine was imported from the East into Greece, where the poets, 
retaining or translating the names, but forgetting their meaning and connec- 
tion; distorted the primitive stories, the sense of which came to be retained 
only in the ancient mysteries. That true sense, however, (he thinks,) may be 
recovered by a careful analysis of the significant names: and his two disser- 
tations (De Mythologid Grecorum Antiquissima, in the Opuscula, vol. ii.) 
exhibit a specimen of this systematic expansion of etymology into narrative. 
The dissent from Creuzer is set forth in their published correspondence, 
especially in his concluding “ Brief an Creuzer iiber das Wesen und die 
Behandlung der Mythologie,” Leipzig, 1819. The following citation from 
his Latin dissertation sets forth his general doctrine: — 

Hermann, De Mythologid Grecorum Antiquissima, p. 4 (Opuscula, vol. 
ii. p. 171): “ Videmus rerum divinarum humsanarumque scientiam ex 
Asia per Lyciam migrantem in Europam: videmus fabulosos poétas pere~ 
grinam doctrinam, monstzuoso tumore orientis sive exutam, sive nondym 


438 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


But this theory, though advocated by several learned men, has 
been shown to be unsupported and erroneous. It implies a mis- 
taken view both of the antiquity and the purport of the myste- 
ries, which cannot be safely carried up even to the age of Hesiod, ° 
and which, though imposing and venerable as religious ceremo- 
nies, included no recondite or esoteric teaching.! 





indutam, quasi de integro Greeca specie procreantes; videmus poétas, illos, 
quorum omnium vera nomina nominibus —ab arte, qua clarebant, petitis -- 
obliterata sunt, diu in Thraciad herentes, raroque tandem etiam cum aliis 
Gracia partibus commercio junctos: qualis Pamphus, non ipse Atheniensis, 
Atheniensibus hymnos Deorum fecit. Videmus denique retrusam paulatim 
in mysteriorum secretam illam sapientum doctrinam, vitiatam religionum 
perturbatione, corruptam inscitid interpretum, obscuratam levitate ameeniora 
sectantium —adeo ut eam ne illi quidem intelligerent, qui hereditariam a 
prioribus poésin colentes, quum ingenii prestantid omnes prestinguerent, 
tanta illos oblivione merserunt, ut ipsi sint primi auctores omnis eruditionis 
habiti.” 

Hermann thinks, however, that by pursuing the suggestions of etymology, 
vestiges may still be discovered, and something like a history compiled, of 
Grecian belief as it stood anterior to Homer and Hesiod: “ Est autem in 
hac omni ratione judicio maxime opus, quia non testibus res agitur, sed ad 
interpretandi solertiam omnia revocanda sunt” (p. 172). To the same gene- 
ral purpose the French work of M. Emérie David, Recherches sur le Dieu 
Jupiter — reviewed by O. Miiller: see the Kleine Schriften of the latter, vol. 
ii. p. 82. 

Mr. Bryant has also employed a profusion of learning, and numerous 
etymological conjectures, to resolve the Greek mythes into mistakes, perver- 
sions, and mutilations, of the exploits and doctrines of oriental tribes long- 
lost and by-gone,— Amonians, Cuthites, Arkites, ete. “ It was Noah (he 
thinks) who was represented under the different names of Thoth, Hermés, 
Menés, Osiris, Zeuth, Atlas, Phoréneus, Prométheus, to which list a farther 
number of great extent might be added: the Not¢ of Anaxagoras was in 
reality the patriarch Noah” (Ant. Mythol. vol. ii. pp. 253, 272). “ The Cuth- 
ites or Amonians, descendants of Noah, settled in Greece from the east, 
celebrated for their skill in building and the arts” (7b. i. p. 502; ii. p. 187), 
The greatest part of the Grecian theology arose from misconception and 
blunders, the stories concerning their gods and heroes were founded on terms 
taisinterpreted or abused” (ib. i. p. 452). “ The number of different actions 
ascribed to the various Grecian. gods or heroes all relate to one people or 
family, and are at bottom one and the same history” (id. ii. p. 57). “ The 
fables of Prométheus and Tityus were taken from ancient Amonian temples, 
from hieroglyphics misunderstood and badly explained” (i. p. 426): see 
especially vol. ii. p. 160. 

? The Anti-Symbolik of Voss, and still more the Aglaophamms of Lobeck, 


TRIPLE THEOLOGY OF PAGANts.1. 439 


Che doctrine, supposed to have been originally symbolized and 
sussequently overclouded, in the Greek mythes, was in reality 
first intruded into them by the unconscious fancies of later inter- 
preters. It was one of the various roads which instructed men 
took to escape from the literal admission of the ancient mythes, 
and to arrive at some new form of belief, more consonant with 
their ideas of what the attributes and character of the gods ought 
to be. It was one of the ways of constituting, by help of the 
mysteries, a philosophical religion apart from the general public, 
and of connecting that distinction with the earliest periods of 
Grecian society. Such a distinction was both avowed and justi- 
fied among the superior men of the later pagan world. Varro 
and Scevola distributed theology into three distinct departments, 
—the mythical or fabulous, the civil, and the physical. The 
first had its place in the theatre, and was left without any inter- 
ference to the poets; the second belonged to the city of political 
community as such, — it comprised the regulation of all the public 
worship and religious rites, and was consigned altogether to the 
direction of the magistrate; the third was the privilege of philo- 
sophers, but was reserved altogether for private discussion in the 
schools, apart from the general public.' As a member of the 





are full of instruction on the subject of this supposed interior doctrine, and 
on the ancient mysteries in general: the latter treatise, especially, is not less 
distinguished for its judicious and circumspect criticism than for its copious 
learning. 

Mr. Halhed (Preface to the Gentoo Code of Laws, pp. xiii—xiv.) has good 
observations on the vanity of all attempts to allegorize the Hindu mytholo- 
gy: he observes, with perfect truth, “ The vulgar and illiterate have always 
understood the mythology of their country in its literal sense; and there 
was a time to every nation, when the highest rank in it was equally vulgar 
and illiterate with the lowest.......... A Hindu esteems the astonishing 
miracles attributed to a Brima, or a Kishen, as facts of the most indubitable 
authenticity, and the relation of them as most strictly historical.” 

Compare also Gibbon’s remarks on the allegorizing tendencies of the later 
Platonists (Hist. Decl. and Fall, vol. iv. p. 71). 

' Varro, ap. Augustin. De Civ. Dei, iv. 27;.vi. 5-6. “ Dicis fabulosos 
Deos accommodatos esse ad theatrum, naturales ad mundum, civiles ad 
urbem.” “ Varro, de religionibus. loquens, multa esse vera dixit, que non 
modo yulgo scire non sit utile, sed etiam tametsi falsa sint, aliter existimare 
populum expediat: et ideo Greecos teletas et mysteria taciturnitate parieti 
busque clausisse” (ibid. iv 21) See Villoison, De Triplici Theologid Com 


440 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


city, the philosopher sympathized with the audience in the thea- 
tre, and took a devout share in the established ceremonies, nor 
was he justified in trying what he heard in the one or saw in 
the other by his own ethical standard. But in the private as+ 
semblies of instructed or inquisitive men, he enjoyed the fullest 
liberty of canvassing every received tenet, and of broaching his 
own theories unreservedly, respecting the existence and nat 

of the gods. By these discussions, the activity of the philosophi. 
cal mind was maintained and truth elicited ; but it was such truth 
as the body of the people ought not to hear, lest their faith in 
their own established religious worship should be overthrown, 
In thus distinguishing the civil theology from the fabulous, Varro 
was enabled to cast upon the poets all the blame of the objec- 
tionable points in the popular theology, and to avoid the neces- 
sity of pronouncing censure on the magistrates, who (he contend- 
ed) had made as good a compromise with the settled prejudices 
of the public as the case permitted. 

The same conflicting sentiments which led the philosophers to 
decompose the divine mythes into allegory, impelled the histo- 
rians to melt down the heroic mythes into something like contin- 
uous political history, with a long series of chronology calculated 
upon the heroic pedigrees. The one process as well as the other 
was interpretative guesswork, proceeding upon unauthorized as- 
sumptions, and without any verifying test or evidence: while it 
frittered away the characteristic beauty of the mythe into some- 
thing essentially anti-mythical, it sought to arrive both at history 
and philosophy by impracticable roads. .'That the superior men of 
antiquity should have striven hard to save the dignity of legends 
which constituted the charm of their literature as well as the sub- 
stance of the popular religion, we cannot be at all surprised; but 





mentatio, p. 8; and Lactantius, De Origin. Error. ii. 3. ‘The doctrine of 
the Stoic Chrysippus, ap. Etymologicon Magn. v. TeAerai — Xpioirrog dé 
pnot, Tode wept Tév Veiwy Adyoue eixérwag Kadeiodar TereTac, YpHvat yap 
tobrovg TeAevtaiove Kal éxt maior diddoxeoSa, rie puxje éyoton¢e Epua Kar 
cexparnuévyc, Kal Tpd¢ Tode duvgnrove crwndy duvapuévne: péya yap elvat 7d 
EDAov trip Vedv dxovoai Te dpa, Kat éyxpareic yevéodat abrar. 

The triple division of Varro is reproduced in Plutarch, Amatorius, p. 7638, 
ra piv pid, Ta d? vouy, TA d? Adyy, Tit EE dpe EoxnKe+ The 8 odv mepl 
Vedw doEn¢ Kal ravraracw qyeudve, Kat diddoxadot yeyévacww hiv of ra 
roinrar, kal a veudderar Kat Tpirov, rl d:A5cogor 


OPINION OF PLATO. 441 


it is gratifying to fiud Plato discussing the subject in a more 
philosophical spirit. The Platonic Socratés, being asked whethez 
he believed the current Attic fable respecting the abduction of 
Oreithyia (daughter of Erechtheus) by Boreas, replies, in sub- 
stance, —“It would not be strange if I disbelieved it, as the 
clever men do; I might then show my cleverness by saying that 
a gust of Boreas blew her down from the rocks above while she 
was at play, and that, having been killed in this manner, she was 
reported to have been carried off by Boreas. Such speculations 
are amusing enough, but they belong to men ingenious and busy- 
minded overmuch, and not greatly to be envied, if it be only for 
this reason, that, after having set right one fable, they are under the 
necessity of applying the same process to a host of others — Hippo- 
centaurs, Chimeras, Gorgons, Pegasus, and numberless other 
monsters and incredibilities. A man, who, disbelieving these 
stories, shall try to find a probable basis for. each of them, will 
display an ill-placed acuteness and take upon himself an endless 
burden, for which I at least have no leisure: accordingly, I 
forego such researches, and believe in the enrrent version of the 
stories.”! 

These remarks of Plato are valuable, not simply because they 
point out the uselessness of digging for a supposed basis of truth 
in the mythes, but because they at the same time suggest the 
true reason for mistrusting all such tentatives. The mythes form 





1 Plato, Pheedr. c. 7. p. 229: — 
Puxprvs. Elné pot, & LGxparec, od rodTo 6 pudoAdynua weider dAndic 


elvat ; 

Som sts, "AAW el dxiotoinr, Gorep of codgol, obx av drorog einv, eita 
cop.louevoc gainv abriy rveiua Bopéov kard Tov TARoLOY TETPGY odv dap- 
pakeia railoveay coat, kat obtw dR Terevtnoacav AeyS7vat ixd Tob Bopéov 
dvapracriv Yeyoveval. ...- ++ 0 . “Ey 68, & Gaidpe, dAAwe pév Ta ToLadTa 
xapievra hyoijzat, Aiav dé decvod kat éxumévov Kat ob ravu ebrvyovc dvdpoc, 
kar’ dAdo pev obdev, br 0 attH dvayny peta TovTO TO TOV "‘Inrokevtaipwv 
eldog éravopSniaFat, Kat aidic Td THE Xipaipac. Kat émippec 68 SyAo¢ ToLOd- 
tiv Topyévar kat Inyaowr, cal dAAwv dunxaveov rAndn Te Kal dromiae Tepax 
rodbywv Tivdv diceav* alg et Tic dmtoTav mpoopiBe kata Td eixdg ExaoTov, 
Gre dypoixy tive cogia ypdpevoc, ToAAne abr@ oxore denoet. "Epot d8 mpd¢ 
radta ovdapic Fatt OYOA ....+eee eee "Oder 6) yalpew saoag tadta, 
meiPbpevoc 53 TH vourlouévy Tept adzay, 5 viv d) E2eyov, oxore ad Tama GAA 
éuavror, etc. 


19* 


442 HISTORY OF GREECE 


a class apart, abundant as well as peculiar: to remove any indi 
vidual mythe from its own class into that of history or philosophy, 
by simple conjecture, and without any collateral evidence, is of no 
advantage, unless you can perform a similar process on the re- 
mainder. If the process be trustworthy, it ought to be applied to 
all; and e converso, if it be not applicable to all, it is not trust- 
worthy as applied to any one specially; always assuming no 
special evidence to be accessible. To detach any individual 
mythe from the class to which it belongs, is to present it in an 
erroneous point of view; we have no choice except to admit them 
as they stand, by putting ourselves approximatively into the 
frame of mind of those for whom they were destined and to whom 
they appeared worthy of credit. 

If Plato thus discountenances all attempts to transform the 
mythes by interpretation into history or philosophy, indirectly 
recognizing the generic difference between them — we find sub- 
stantially the same view pervading the elaborate precepts in his 
treatise on the Republic. He there regards the mythes, not as 
embodying either matter-of-fact or philosophical principle, but as 
portions of religious and patriotic faith, and instruments of ethical 
tuition. Instead of allowing the poets to frame them according 
to the impulses of their own genius, and with a view to imme 
liate popularity, he directs the legislator to provide types of his 
own for the characters of the gods and heroes, and to suppress all 
such divine and heroic legends as are not in harmony with these 
preéstablished canons. In the Platonic system, the mythes are 
not to be matters of history, nor yet of spontaneous or casual fic- 
tion, but of prescribed faith: he supposes that the people will 
believe, as a thing of course, what the poets circulate, and he 
therefore directs that the latter shall circulate nothing which does 
not tend to ennoble and improve the feelings. He conceives the 
mythes as stories composed to illustrate the general sentiments 
of the poets and the community, respecting the character and 
attributes of the gods and heroes, or respecting the social relations, 
and ethical duties as well as motives of mankind: hence the obli- 
gation upon the legislator to prescribe beforehand the types of 
character which shall be illustrated, and to restrain the poets from 
following out any opposing fancies. “ Let us neither believe our: 
selves (he exclaims), nor permit any one to circulate, that Thé. 





OPINION OF PLATO. 443 


seus son of Poscidén and Peirithéus son of Zeus, or any other 
hero or son of a god, could ever have brought themselves to 
commit abductions or other enormities such as are now falsely 
ascribed to them. We must compel the poets to say, either that 
such persons were not the sons of gods, or that they were not the 
perpetrators of such misdeeds.”! 

Most of the mythes which the youth hear and repeat (accord- 
ing to Plato) are false, but some of them are true: the great and 
prominent mythes which appear in Homer and Hesiod are no less 
fictions than the rest. But fiction constitutes one of the indis- 
pensable instruments of mental training as well as truth; only 
the legislator must take care that the fiction-so employed shall be 
peneficent and not mischievous. As the mischievous fictions 
(he says) take their rise from wrong preconceptions respecting 
che character of the gods and heroes, so the way to correct them 
is to enforce, by authorized compositions, the adoption of a more 
correct standard.3 





1 Plato, Repub. iii. 5. p. 391. The perfect ignorance of all men respecting 
the gods, rendered the task of fiction easy (Plato, Kritias, p. 107 ). 

2 Plato, Repub. ii. 16. p. 377. Adywv d2 dirrov eidoc, Td uev dAndee, ped- 
boc & &repov; Nai, Tavdevréov d év dudorépotc, xpotepov 8’ év rote petde- 
CONE sates Ob pavdaverc, bre mpdrov toi¢ ratdiowg wiFoue Aéyouev* TodTO dé 
rov Oc Td bAov eimeiv peidoc, Eve d2 Kal GANDI......6+: IpGrov jpiv éco- 
rarntéov toig uvtorotoic, Kal dv piv dy Kardov pidov Toijnowow, éyKpitéov, 
jv O° dy ph, Groxpitéov...... Ov d& viv Aéyovat, Todg TOAAOdE ExBAntéov 
sp cutie odc “Hotodog kat "Ounpoc quiv édeyérny, kai of GAAot mointal. Obroe 
yap mov podovs rotc dvdpdroig pevdets ovvtidévres EAeyév te kal A€éyovot. 
ilotove 6), 9 8 b¢, Kal Ti abrdv peupopevog Aéyerc ; “Orep, hv 0 bya, xp7 Kat 
mporov kat paduora péngeodat, GAAwe Te Kal dav Tig ph Karde pebdnra. Ti 
rodro; “Orav tig elkaty Kaxde TH Adyw wept Bedv Te Kal Hpouwr, olot elowy, 
éaomep ypagede pndév borkdTa ypagur ole dv dpora BobaAnra: ypapat. 

The same train of thought, and the precepts founded upon it, are followed 
up through chaps. 17, 18,and 19; compare De Legg. xii. p. 941. ; 

Instead of recognizing the popular or dramatic theology as something 
distinct from the civil (as Varro did), Plato suppresses the former as a sep- 
arate department and merges it in the latter. i So 

3 Plato, Repub. ii. c. 21. p. 382. Td év rote Aéyowg peddog more Kat Ti xpi 
OLpov, GOTE pi d&tov elvat picove ; "Ap’ ob mpoc TE TOdS mroAepioug kat Top 
kahovpévar giAwv, brav did paviav h Ta dvo.av kakév Te éxtxyetpOot Tpar- 
rev, Tore amorponhe Evexa Oe Papyaxov xphotpov yiyvetat ; Kat év alg 
piv dy théyoper Taig pvdoroyiare, dvd Td pH eldévat dmg 
raaAndic Eyer wept TOV wadacoy, dgopotodvtec to aay: 
Bet rd Wendoe, bri udALaTA, ObTW YpHauoOY TOLODUED » 


444 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


The comments which Plato has delivered with so much foree 
in his Republic, and the enactments which he deduces from them, 
are inthe main an expansion of that sentiment of condemnation, 
which he shared with so many other philosophers, towards a large 
portion of the Homeric and Hesiodic stories.1 But the manner 
in which he has set forth this opinion, unfolds to us more clearly the 
real character of the mythical narratives. They are creations of 
the productive minds in the community, deduced from the sup- 
posed attributes of the gods and heroes: so Plato views them, 
and in such character he proposes to amend them. The legisla- 
tor would cause to be prepared a better and truer picture of the 
foretime, because he would start from truer (that is to say, more 
creditable) conceptions of the gods and heroes. For Plato re- 
jects the mythes respecting Zeus and Héré, or Théseus and 
Peirithous, not from any want of evidence, but because they are 
unworthy of gods and heroes: he proposes to call forth new 
mythes, which, though he admits them at the outset to be fiction, 
he knows will soon be received as true, and supply more valua- 
ble lessons of conduct. 

We may consider, then, that Plato disapproves of the attempt 
to identify the old mythes either with exaggerated history or 
with disguised philosophy. He shares in the current faith, with- 
out any suspicion or criticism, as to Orpheus, Palamédés, Daeda- 
lus, Amphidn, Théseus, Achilles, Cheirdn, and other mythical 
personages ;2 but what chiefly fills his mind is, the inherited sen- 
timent of deep reverence for these superhuman characters and 
for the age to which they belonged, —a sentiment sufficiently 
strong to render him not only an unbeliever in such legends as 
conflict with it, but also a deliberate creator of new legends for 
the purpose of expanding and gratifying it. The more we ex- 
amine this sentiment, both in the mind of Plato as well as in 





1 The censure which Xenophanés pronounced upon the Homeric legends 
has already been noticed: Herakleitus (Diogen. Laért. ix. 1) and Metrodo- 
rus, the companion and follower of Epicurus, were not less profuse in their 
invectives, év ypapypaot TocotTorg TH mownTH AedowWdpyrac (Plutarch, Non 
posse suaviter vivi secundym Epicurum, p. 1086). He even advised persons 
not te be ashamed to confess their utter ignorance of Homer, to the extent 
of not knowing whether Hector was a Greek or a Trojan (Plut. ib. p. 1094) 

? Plato, Republic iii. 4-5. p. 391; De Legg. iii. 1. p. 677. 


GRECIAN CHRONOLOGY FOUNDED UN MYTHES. 445 


that of the Greeks generally, the more shall we be convinced 
that it formed essentially and inseparably a portion of Hellenic 
religious faith. —The mythe both presupposes, and springs out of, 
a settled basis, and a strong expansive force of religious, social, 
and patriotic feeling, operating upon a past which is little better 
than a blank as to positive knowledge. It resembles history, in 
so far as its form is narrative ; it resembles philosophy, in so far 
as it is occasionally illustrative ; but in its essence and substance, 
in the mental tendencies by which it is created as well as in those 
by which it is judged and upheld, it is a popularized expression 
of the divine and heroic faith of the people. 

Grecian antiquity cannot be at all understood except in con- 
nection with Grecian religion. It begins with gods and it ends 
with historical men, the former being recognized not simply as 
gods, but as primitive ancestors, and connected with the latter by 
a long mythical genealogy, partly heroic and partly human. Now 
the whole value of such genealogies arises from their being taken 
entire; the god or hero at the topis in point of fact the most im- 
portant member of the whole ;! for the length and continuity of 
the series arises from anxiety on the part of historical men to join 
themselves by a thread of descent with the being whom they 
worshipped in their gentile sacrifices. Without the ancestorial 
god, the whole pedigree would have become not only acephalous, 
but worthless and uninteresting. The pride of the Herakleids, 
Asklepiads, Eakids, Neleids, Deedalids, etc. was attached to the 
primitive eponymous hero and to the god from whom they sprung, 
not to the line of names, generally long and barren, through which 
the divine or heroic dignity gradually dwindled down into com- 
mon manhood. — Indeed, the length of the genealogy (as I have 
before remarked) was an evidence of the humility of the his- 
torical man, which led him to place himself at a respectful dis- 
tance from the gods or heroes; for Hekatzus of Milétus, who 
ranked himself as the fifteenth descendant of a god, might per- 





1 For a description of similar tendencies in the Asiatic religions, see 
Movers, Die Phénizier, ch. v. p. 153 (Bonn, 1841): he points out the same 
phenomena as in the Greek, — coalescence between the ideas of ancestry 
and worship,— confusion between gods and men in the past, — increasing 
tendency to Euemerize (pp. 156-157), 


446 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


haps have accounted it an overweening impiety in any living man 
to claim a god for his immediate father. . 

The whole chronology of Greece, anterior to 776 B. ¢., consists 
of calculations founded upon these mythical genealogies, espe- 
cially upon that of the Spartan kings and their descent from 
Héraklés,— thirty years being commonly taken as the equiva- 
lent of a generation, or about three generations to a century. 
This process of computation was altogether illusory, as applying 
historical and chronological conditions to a case on which they 
had no bearing. Though the domain of history was seemingly 
enlarged, the religious element was tacitly set aside: when the 
heroes and gods were chronologized, they became insensibly ap- 
proximated to the limits of humanity, and the process indirectly 
gave encouragement to the theory of Euémerus. Personages 
originally legendary and poetical were erected into definite land- 
marks for measuring the duration of the foretime, thus gaining in 
respect to historical distinctness, but not without loss on the score 
of religious association. Both Euémerus and the subsequent 
Christian writers, who denied the original and inherent divinity 
of the pagan gods, had a great advantage in carrying their chro- 
nological researches strictly and consistently upwards —for all 
chronology fails as soon as we suppose a race superior to common 
humanity. 

Moreover, it is to be remarked that the pedigree of the Spartan 
kings, which Apollodérus and Eratosthenés selected as the basis 
of their estimate of time, is nowise superior in credibility and 
trustworthiness to the thousand other gentile and family pedigrees ' 
with which Greece abounded; it is rather indeed to be numbered 
among the most incredible of all, seeing that Héraklés as a pro- 
genitor is placed at the head of perhaps more pedigrees than any 
other Grecian god or hero.! The descent of the Spartan king 
Leonidas from Héraklés rests upon no better evidence than that 
of Aristotle or Hippocratés from Asklépius,? — of Evagoras or 





1 According to that which Aristotle seems to recognize (Histor. Animal. 
vii. 6), Héraklés was father of seventy-two sons, but of only one daughter— 
he was essentially éppevéyovor, illustrating one of the physical peculiarities 
noticed by Aristotle. Euripidés, Lowever, mentions daughters of Héraklés in 
the plural number (Euripid. Herakleid. 45). 


* Hippoeratés was twentieth in descent from Héraklés, and nineteenth 


MYTHICAL GENEALOGIES. 447 


Thucydidés from AEakus,— of Socratés from Daedalus, — of the 
Spartan heraldic family from Talthybius,— of the prophetic 
Tamid family in Elis from Iamus,—of the root-gatherers in 
Pélion from Cheirén,—and of Hekateus and his gens from 
some god in the sixteenth ascending line of the series. There 
is little exaggeration in saying, indeed, that no permanent com- 
bination of men in Greece, religious, social, or professional, was 
without a similar pedigree ; all arising out of the same exigences 
of the feelings and imagination, to personify as well as to sanctify 
the bond of union among the members... Every one of these 
gentes began with a religious and ended with an historical person. 
At some point or other in the upward series, entities of history 
were exchanged for entities of religion; but where that point is 
to be found we are unable to say, nor had the wisest of the an- 
cient Greeks any means of determining. Thus much, however, 
we know, that the series taken as a whole, though dear and pre- 
cious to the believing Greek, possesses no value as chronological 
evidence to the historian. 

When Hekatzus visited Thébes in Egypt, he mentioned to the 
Egyptian priests, doubtless with a feeling of satisfaction and 
pride, the imposing pedigree of the gens to which he belonged, — 
with fifteen ancestors in ascending line, and a god as the initial 
progenitor. But he found himself immeasurably overdone by the 
priests “ who genealogized against him.”! They showed to him 
three hundred and forty-one wooden colossal statues, representing 
the succession of chief priests in the temple in uninterrupted 
series from father to son, through a space of 11,300 years. Prior 
to the commencement of this long period (they said), the gods 
‘dwelling along with men, had exercised sway in Egypt; but they 





from Asklépius (Vita Hippocr. by Soranus, ap. Westermann, Scriptor, 
Biographice. viii. 1); about Aristotle, see Diogen. Laért. v. 1. Xenophén, the 
physician of the emperor Claudius, was also an Asklepiad (Tacit. Ann. xii. 
61). 

Rhodes, the neighboring island to Kés, was the gens ‘A/.adaz, or sons 
of Hélios, specially distinguished from the ‘AAcacra? of mere associated 
worshippers of Hélios, 7d xocvdv tév ‘AZtadGv Ka? Tov ‘A?vacTév (see the 
Inscription in Boeckh’s Collection, No. 2525, with Boeckh’s comment). 

1 Herodot. ii. 144. ‘Exaraiw d& yevendoynoavtt éwirdv, kat dvadjoarTi 
é¢ éxxacdéxatov Sedv, dvteyevendoynoav énxt rH dprdujoet, ob dSexdueva wap 
girod, ard Seod yévecdat dvOpwrov* dvreyevenddynoav dé Gde. etc 


448 HISTORY OF GREECE. } 


repudiated altogether the idea of men begotter by ee or of 
heroes.! 

But these counter-genealogies, are, in respect to trustwcrthin ess 
and evidence, on the same footing. Each represents partly the 
religious faith, partly the retrospective imagination, of the persons 
from whom it emanated ; in each, the lower members of the series 
(to what extent we cannot tell) are r2al, the upper members fabu- 
lous ; but in each also the series derived all its interest and all 
its imposing effect from being conceived unbroken and entire. 
Herodotus is much perplexed by the capital discrepancy between 
the Grecian and Egyptian chronologies, and vainly employs his 
ingenuity in reconciling them. There is no standard of objective 
evidence by which either the one or the other of them can be 
tried: each has its own subjective value, in conjunction with the 
faith and feelings of Egyptians and Greeks, and each presup- 
poses in the believer certain mental prepossessions which are not 
to be found beyond its own local limits. Nor is the greater or 
less extent of duration at all important, when we once pass the 
limits of evidence and verifiable reality. One century of recorded 
time, adequately studded with authentic and orderly events, pre- 
sents a greater mass and a greater difficulty of transition to the 
imagination than a hundred centuries of barren genealogy. Her- 
odotus, in discussing the age of Homer and Hesiod, treats an an- 
terior point of 400 years as if it were only yesterday ; the reign 
of Henry VI. is separated from us by an equal interval, and the 
reader will not require to be reminded how long that interval 
now appears. , 

The mythical age was peopled with a mingled aggregate of 
gods, heroes, and men, so confounded together that it was often 
impossible to distinguish to which class any individual name 
belonged. In regard to the Thracian god Zalmoxis, the Helles- 
pontic Greeks interpreted his character and attributes according 
to the scheme of Euémerism. They affirmed that he had been 
a man, the slave of the philosopher Pythagoras at Samos, and 
that he had by abilities and artifice established a religious ascen- 
dency over the minds of the Thracians, and obtained from them 





' Herod. ii. 143-145. Kai raira Alybrrios dtpexéwe gaolv émiovucdat, aiet 
te AoyiCouevor Kal ale? droypadéuevos Ta Ered. 


CONFUSION BETWEEN GODS AND MEN. 449 


divine honors. Herodotus cannot bring himself to believe this 
story, but he frankly avows his inability to determine ‘whether 
Zalmoxis was a god or a man,! nor can he extricate himself from 
a similar embarrassment in respect to Dionysus and Pan. Amidst 
the confusion of the Homeric fight, the goddess Athéné confers 
upon Diomédés the miraculous favor of dispelling the mist from 
his eyes, so as to enable him to discriminate gods from men; and 
nothing less than a similar miracle could enable a critical reader 
of the mythical narratives to draw an ascertained boundary-line 
between the two? But the original hearers of the mythes felt 
neither surprise nor displeasure from this confusion of the divine 
with the human individual. They looked at the past with a film 





’ Herod. iv. 94-96. After having related the Euemeristic version given 
by the Hellespontic Greeks, he concludes with his characteristic frankness 
and simplicity —’Ey@ 62, rep? uv tobtov kal rod Katayaiov olxjpuaroc, obre 
drioréw, obte Gv miorebw Tt Ainv. doxéw d2 TOAACICL Erect mpdrepov Tov ZaA- 
uogiv rodtov yevéodat Tudaydpew. ire d2 éyéveré rig Zadpotic dvdpwroe, 
el’ éori daivwv tig Térgot obrog éxixapioc, yatpétwo. So Plutarch (Numa 
ce. 19) will not undertake to determine whether Janus was a god or a king 
eire dainwr, eite BactAede yevduevoc, ete. 

Herakleitus the philosopher said that men were eo? Pvyro?, and the gods 
were dvdporo ddavaroe (Lucian, Vitar. Auctio. c. 13. vol. i. p. 303, Tauch. 
compare the same author, Dialog. Mortuor. iii. vol. i. p. 182, ed. Tauchn). 

2 Tliad, v. 127:— 

*Ayddv & ad ror an’ d¢0aruar EAov, 7 mplv exiper, 
Odp’ ed yryvdckyc huév Bedv, 702 kat dvdpa. 

Of this undistinguishable confusion between gods and men, striking illus- 
trations are to be found both in the third book of Cicero de Natura Deorum 
(16-21), and in the long disquisition of Strabo (x. pp. 467-474) respecting 
the Kabeiri, the Korybantes, the Dactyls of Ida; the more so, as he cites the 
statements of Pherekydés, Akusilaus, Démétrius of Sképsis, and others. 
Under the Roman empire, the lands in Greece belonging to the immortal 
gods were exempted from tribute. The Roman tax-collectors refused to 
recognize as immortal gods any persons who had once been men; but this 
rule could not be clearly applied (Cicero, Nat. Deor. iii. 20). See the re- 
marks of Pausanias (ii. 26,7) about Asklépius: Galen, too,is doubtful about 
Asklépius and Dionysus —’AckAnmtd¢ yé tot kat Arévvooc, elt’ dvdparx 
mporepov horny, eite kat dpxiSev Geot (Galen in Protreptic. 9. tom. i. p. 22, 
ed. Kahn). Xenophén (De Venat. c. i} considers Cheirén as the brother ot 
Zeus. 

The ridicule of Lucian (Decrum Concilium, t. iii. p 527-538, Hems.} 
brings out still more forcibly the confusion here indicated. 


VOL. 1. 2900. 


450 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


of faith over their eyes — neither knowing the value, nor desirmg 
the attainment, of an unclouded vision. The intimate companion 
ship, and the occasional mistake of identity between gods and 
men, were in full harmony with their reverential restrospect. 
And we, accordingly, see the poet Ovid in his Fasti, when he un- 
dertakes the task of unfolding the legendary antiquities of early 
Rome, reacquiring, by the inspiration of Juno, the power of 
seeing gods and men in immediate vicinity and conjunct action, 
such as it existed before the development of the critical and his- 
torical sense.! 

To resume, in brief, what has been laid down in this and the 
preceding chapters respecting the Grecian mythes: — 

1. They are a special product of the imagination and feelings, 
radically distinct both from history and philosophy: they cannot 
be broken down and decomposed into the one, nor allegorized into 
the other. There are indeed some particular and even assignable 
mythes, which raise intrinsic presumption of an allegorizing ten- 
dency; and there are doubtless some others, though not specially 
assignable, which contain portions of matter of fact, or names of 
real persons, embodied in them. But such matter of fact cannot 
be verified by any intrinsic mark, nor we are entitled to presume 
its existence in any given case unless some collateral evidence 
can be produced. 

2. We are not warranted in applying to the mythical world 
the rules either of historical credibility or chronological sequence. 
Its personages are gods, heroes, and men, in constant juxtaposition 
and reciprocal sympathy; men, too, of whom we know a large 
proportion to be fictitious, and of whom we can never ascertain 
how many may have been real. No series of such personages 
ean serve as materials for chronological calculation. 





} Ovi, Fasti, vi. 6-20: — 
“Fas mihi precipue vultus vidisse Deorum, 
Vel quia sum vates, vel quia sacra cano.....- 
.«. Bece Deas vidi. ........ : 
Horrueram, tacitoque animum pallore fatebar: 
Cum Dea, quos fecit, sustulit ipsa metus. 
“ Namque ait — O vates, Romani conditor anni, 
Ause per exiguos magna referre modos ; 
Jus tibi fecisti numen cceleste videndi, 
Cum placuit numeris condere festa tais.” 


GENERAL RECAPITULATION. 451 


3. The mythes were originally produced in an age which had 
no records, no philosophy, no criticism, no canon of belief, and 
searcely any tincture either of astronomy or geography — but 
which, on the other hand, was full of religious faith, distinguished 
for quick and susceptible imagination, seeing personal agents 
where we look only for objects and connecting laws;—an age, 
moreover, eager for new narrative, accepting with the unconscious 
impressibility of children (the question of truth or falsehood being 
never formally raised) all which ran in harmony with its pre- 
existing feelings, and penetrable by inspired prophets and poets 
in the same proportion that it was indifferent to positive evidence. 
To such hearers did the primitive poet. or story-teller address 
himself: it was the glory of his productive genius to provide 
suitable narrative expression for the faith and emotions which he 
shared in common with them, and the rich stock of Grecian 
mythes attests how admirably he performed his task. As the 
gods and the heroes formed the conspicuous object of national 
reverence, so the mythes were partly divine, partly heroic, partly 
both in one.! The adventures of Achilles, Helen, and Diomédés, 
of Cédipus and Adrastus, of Meleager and Athza, of Jason and 
the Argd, were recounted by the same tongues, and accepted with 
the same unsuspecting confidence, as those of Apollo and Artemis, 
of Arés and Aphrodité, of Poseidén and Héraklés. 

4, The time however came, when this plausibility ceased to be 
complete. The Grecian mind made an important advance, social- 
ly, ethically, and intellectually. Philosophy and history were 
constituted, prose writing and chronological records became famil- 
iar; a canon of belief more or less critical came to be tacitly 
recognized. Moreover, superior men profited more largely by 
the stimulus, and contracted habits of judging different from the 





1 The fourth Eclogue of Virgil, under the form of a prophecy, gives a 
faithful picture of the heroic and divine past, to which the legends of Troy 
und the Argonauts belonged :— 

“Jlle Detim vitam accipiet, Divisque videbit 
Permixtos heroas,” etc. 

“ Alter erit tum Tiphys et altera que vehat Argo 
Delectos heroas: erunt etiam altera bella, " 
Atque iterum ad Trojam magnus mittetur Achilles.” 


452 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


vulgar: the god Elenchus! (to use a personificaticn of Menander) 
the giver and prover of truth, descended into their minds. Into 
the new intellectual medium, thus altered in its elements, and no 
longer uniform in its quality, the mythes descended by inherit- 
ance; but they were found, to a certain extent, out of harmony 
even with the feelings of the people, and altogether dissonant 
with those of instructed men. But the most superior Greek was 
still a Greek, and cherished the common reverential sentiment 
towards the foretime of his country. Though he could neither 
believe nor respect the mythes as they stood, he was under an 
imperious mental necessity to transform them into a state worthy 
of his belief and respect. Whilst the literal mythe still continued 
to float among the poets and the people, critical men interpreted, 
altered, decomposed, and added, until they found something which 
satisfied their minds as a supposed real basis. They manufac- 
tured some dogmas of supposed original philosophy, and a long 
series of fancied history and chronology, retaining the mythical 
names and generations even when they were obliged to discard 
or recast the mythical events. The interpreted mythe was thus 
promoted into a reality, while the literal mythe was degraded into 
a fiction.2 





1 Lucian, Pseudol. c. 4. Iapaxagréoc quiv tov Mevavdpov mpoddyur ele, 6 
"Ereyxoc, didoc dAndeig nai rappnoig Bede, oby 6 donudtatog Tév éxt Thy 
oxhvqy avaBavévtwv. (See Meineke ad Menandr. p. 284.) 

2 The following passage from Dr. Ferguson’s aeons on Civil Society (part 
ii. sect. i. p. 126) bears well on the subject before us: 

“Jf conjectures and opinions formed at a preenie have not a sufficient 
authority in the history of mankind, the domestic antiquities of every nation 
must for this very reason be received with caution. They are, for the most 
part, the mere conjectures or the fictions of subsequent ages ; and even where 
at first they contained some resemblance of truth, they still vary with the 
imagination of those by whom they were transmitted, and in every genera- 
tion receive a different form. They are made to bear the stamp of the times 
through which they have pussed in the form of tradition, not of the ages to 
which their pretended descriptions relate. ........... When traditionary 
fables are rehearsed by the vulgar, they bear the marks of a national charee- 
ter, and though mixed with absurdities, often raise the imagination and mote 
the heart: when made the materials of poetry, and adorned by the skill and 
the eloquence of an ardent and superior mind, they instruct the understand- 
ing as well as engage the passions. It is only in the management of mere 
untiquaries, or stript of the ornaments which the lays of history forbid thena 


SUBSEQUENT AGE OF INTERPREYATION. 453 


The habit of distinguishing the interpreted from the literal 
mythe has passed from the literary men of antiquity to those of 
the modern world, who have for the most part construed the 
divine mythes as allegorized philosophy, and the heroic mythes 
as exaggerated, adorned, and over-colored history. The early 
ages of Greece have thus been peopled with quasi-historical per- 
sons and quasi-historical events, all extracted from the mythes 
after making certain allowances for poetical ornament. But we 
must not treat this extracted product as if it were the original 
substance ; we cannot properly understand it except by viewing 
it in connection with the literal mythes out of which it was ob- 
tained, in their primitive age and appropriate medium, before the 
superior minds had yet outgrown the common faith in an all- 
personified Nature, and learned to restrict the divine free-agency 
by the supposition of invariable physical laws. It is in this point 
of view that the mythes are important for any one who would 
correctly appreciate the general tone of Grecian thought and 
feeling ; for they were the universal mental stock of the Hellenic 
world — common to men and women, rich and poor, instructed 
and ignorant; they were in every one’s memory and in every 
one’s mouth,! while science and history were confined to com- 





to wear, that they become unfit even to amuse the fancy or to serve any purpose 
whatever. 

“Jt were absurd to quote the fable of the Iliad or the Odyssey, the 
legend of Hercules, Theseus, and Cidipus, as authorities in matters of fact 
relating to the history of mankind ; but they may, with great justice, be cited 
to ascertain what were the conceptions and sentiments of the age in which 
they were composed, or to characterize the genius of that people with whose 
imaginations they were blended, and by whom they were fondly rehearsed 
and admired. In this manner, fiction may be admitted to vouch for ths 
genius of nations, while history has nothing to offer worthy of credit.” 

To the same purpose, M. Paulin Paris (in his Lettre & M. i. de Mon: 
merqué, prefixed to the Roman de Berte aux Grans Piés, Paris, 1836), re- 
specting the “romans” of the Middle Ages: “Pcmur bien connaitre Vhis- 
toire du moyen Age, non pas celle des faits, mais celle des meeurs qui rendent 
les faits vraisemblables, il faut Pavoir étudiée dans les romans, et voila 
pourquoi I’Histoire de France n’est pas encore faite.” (p. xxi.) ‘ 

1 A curious evidence of the undiminished popularity of the Grecian mythes 
to the exclusion even of recent history, is preserved by Vopiscus at the be- 
ginning of his Life of Aurelian. re 

The prefect of the city of Rome, Junius Tiberianus, tovk Vopiscus into 


454 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


paratively few. We know from Thucydidés how erroneously 
and carelessly the Athenian public of his day retained the his 
tory of Peisistratus, only one century past;! but the adventures 
of the gods and heroes, the numberless explanatory legends at- 
tached to visible objects and periodical ceremonies, were the 
theme of general talk, and any man unacquainted with them 
would have found himself partially excluded from the sympathy 
of his neighbors. The theatrical representations, exhibited to the 
entire city population, and listened to with enthusiastic interest, 
both presupposed and perpetuated acquaintance with the great 
lines of heroic fable: indeed, in later times even the pantomimic 
dancers embraced in their representations the whole field of my- 
thical incident, and their immense success proves at once how 
popular and how well known such subjects were. The names 
and attributes of the heroes were incessantly alluded to in the 
way of illustration, to point out a consoling, admonitory, or re- 
pressive moral: the simple mention of any of them sufficed to 
eall up in every one’s mind the principal events of his life, and 
the poet or rhapsode could thus calculate on touching chords not 
less familiar than susceptible.? 





his carriage on the festival-day of the Hilaria; he was connected by the ties 
of relationship with Aurelian, who had died about a generation before —and 
as the carriage passed by the splendid Temple of the Sun, which Aurelian 
had consecrated, he asked Vopiscus, what author had written the life of that 
emperor? To which Vopiscus replied, that he had read some Greek works 
which touched upon Aurelian, but nothing.in Latin. Whereat the venerable 
prefect was profoundly grieved: “ Dolorem gemitis sui vir sanctus per hac 
verba profudit: Ergo Thersitem, Sinonem, ceteraque illa prodigia vetustatis, 
et nos bene scimus, et posteri frequentubunt: divum Aurelianum, clarissimum 
principem, scyerissimum Imperatorem, per quem totus Romano nomini orbis 
est restitutus, posteri nescient?. Deus avertat hanc amentiam! Et tamen, 
si bene memini, ephemeridas illius viri scriptas habemus,” ete. (Historix 
August. Scriptt. p. 209, ed. Salmas.) 

This impressive remonstrance produced the Life of Aurelian by Vopiscus 
The materials seem to have been ample and authentic; it is to be regretted 
that they did not fall into the hands of anauthor qualified to turn them te 
better account. 

} Thucyd, vi. 56. ; 

* Pausan. i. 3,3, Aéyeras wiv 3) Kal GAAa ode dnd} mapa Tore moAAaTe, 
ola loropiag dvnxéore obat, Kal boca HKovov ebOve éx. rawWav Ev Te ROpote Kal 
tpayydiare xioTa hyovpévacc, etc. The treatise of Lucian, De Saltatione, is 


es 


i 


POPULARITY OF GRECIAN MY fdas. 455 


A similar effect was produced by the multiplied religious fes- 
tivals and processions, as well as by the oracles and propsccies 





acurious proof how much these mythes were in every one’s memory, and 
how large the range of knowledge of them was which a good dancer pos- 
sessed (see particularly c. 76-79. t. ii. p. 308-310, Hemst). 

Antiphanés ap. Athene. vi. p. 223 :— 

Makdpiév tori } tpaywdia 
noinua kata wavt’, eb ye mpirov of Adyor 
tnd tov Year elow éyvwpicuevos 
mplv Kai tiv’ eineiv: O¢ brouvpcat povoy 
dei Tov roinrHv. Oldirovy yap dv ye $0, 
Ta 0° Gada rav7’ icacww 6 xarhp Aaioc, 
Larne "loxaorn, Svyarépec, maidec tiveg* 
ti meice® obroc, Te wewoinkev. “Avy waALv 

ely Tig ’AAKuaiwva, cal Ta waWia 
mav7’ evddce elpny’, drt wavele aréxtove 
tiv parep > dyavaxtov 0 "Adpaotoc ev béiwg 
Heel, TaALy O° arevorr, ete. 

The first pages of the eleventh Oration of Dia Chrysostom contain some 
striking passages both as to the universal acquaintance with the mythes, and 
as to their extreme popularity (Or. xi. p. 307-312, Reisk). See also the 
commencement of Heraklidés, De AllegoriA Homerica (ap. Scriptt. Myth. 
ed. Gale, p. 408), about the familiarity with Homer. 

The Lydé of the poet Antimachus was composed for his own consolation 
under sorrow, by enumerating the 7jpwixa¢e cvudopa¢g (Plutarch, Consolat. 
ad Apollon. c. 9.p. 106: compare Aischines cont. Ktesiph. c. 48): a sepul- 
chral inscription in Théra, on the untimely death of Admétus, a youth of the 
heroic gens Aigide, makes a touching allusion to his ancestors Péleus and 
Pherés (Boeckh, C. I. +. ii. p. 1087). 

A curious passage of Aristotle is preserved by Démétrius Phalereus (ep? 
‘Epunveiac, c. 144),—"Oow yap adtirnce cat povarne eipt, drAouvdéorepog 
yéyova (compare the passage in the Nikomachean Ethics, i.9, wovdry¢ kal 
drexvoc). Stahr refers this to a letter of Aristotle written in his old age, the 
mythes being the consolation of his solitude (Aristotelia, i. p. 201). 

For the employment of the mythical names and incidents as topics of 
pleasing and familiar comparison, see Menander, Iep? ’Ex:decatix.. §, iv- 
capp. 9 and 11, ap. Walz. Coll. Rhett. t. ix. pp. 283-294. The degree in 
which they passed into the ordinary songs of women is illustrated by a 
touching epigram contained among the Chian Inscriptions published in 
Boeckh’s Collection (No. 2236) :— 

Bitt® kat Parvic, dian juépn (2), al cvvéprdor, 
Ai. wevixpat, ypaiat, TH0 ExAiSquEV Guod. 
"Augorepar Koa, rparae yévog—G yhunde Gpdpoc, 
IIpd¢ Adxvov @ piGove Adouev Huctéor. 
These two poor women were rot afraid to boast of their family doscent 


456 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


which circulated in every city. The annual departure of the 
Theéric ship from Athens to the sacred island of Délos, kept 
alive, in the minds of Athenians generally, the legend of Théseus 
and his adventurous enterprise in Krete;! and in like manner 
most of the other public rites and ceremonies were of a com- 
memorative character, deduced from some mythical person or 
incident familiarly known to natives, and forming to strangers a 
portion of the curiosities of the place During the period of 
Grecian subjection under the Romans, these curiosities, together 
with their works of art and their legends, were especially clung 
to as a set-off against present degradation. The Théban citizen 
who found himself restrained from the liberty enjoyed by all 
other Greeks, of consulting Amphiaraéus as a prophet, though 
the sanctuary and chapel of the hero stood in his own city — ~ 





they probably belonged to some noble gens which traced its origin to a god 
or a hero. About the songs of women, see also Agathias, i. 7. p. 29, ed. 
Bonn. 

In the family of the wealthy Athenian Démocratés was a legend, that his 
primitive ancestor (son of Zeus by the daughter of the Archégetés of the 
déme Aixéneis, to which he belonged) had received Heraklés at his table: 
this legend was so rife that the old women sung it,— drep ai ypaiat ddovat 
(Plato, Lysis, p. 205). Compare also a legend of the déme ’Avayupodc, 
mentioned in Suidas ad voc. 

“Who is this virgin ?” asks Orestés from Pyladés in the Iphigeneia in 
Tauris of Euripidés (662), respecting his sister Iphigeneia, whom he does 
not know as priestess of Artemis in a foreign land: — 

Tic éoriy 4 vedvic; Oc ‘EAAgviKos 
"Avape’ Hudc Tob¢ 7° év 'IAig révovg 
Néorov 7’ ’Ayatév, Tov 7’ év olwvoig coddv 
KdAyarr’, "AxtAdéwe 7’ obvop’, ete. 

FRR KE SO TET éotiv @ Sévn yévocg 

"Exetdev, "Apyeia tie, ete. 

' Plato, Pheedo, c. 2. 

* The Philopseudes of Lucian (t. iii. p. 31, Hemst. cap. 2,3, 4) shows not 
only the pride which the general public of Athens and Thébes took in their 
old mythes (Triptolemus, Boreas, and Oreithyia, the Sparti, etc.), but the 
way in which they treated every man who called the stories in question as a 
fool or as an atheist. He remarks, that if the guides who showed the anti- 
quities had been restraired to tell nothing but what was true, they would 
have died of hunger ; for the visiting strangers would not care to hear plain 
trath, even if they could have got it for nothing (uydé ducodt tov Sévov 
GAqSie GKobew 2deAnoavror). 


VARIETY OF MYTHICAL RELICS. 457 


wuld not be satisfied without a knowledge of the story which 
explained the origin of such prohibition,! and which conducted 
him back to the originally hostile relations between Amphiaraus 
and Thébes. Nor can we suppose among the citizens of Sikyén 
anything less than a perfect and reverential conception of the 
legend of Thébes, when we read the account given by Herodotus 
of the conduct of the despot Kleisthenés in regard to Adrastus 
and Melanippus.2 The Troezenian youths and maidens,3 who 
universally, when on the eve of marriage, consecrated an offering 
of their hair at the Heréon of Hippolytus, maintained a lively 
recollection of the legend of that unhappy recusant whom Aphro- 
dité had so cruelly punished. Abundant relics preserved in many 
Grecian cities and temples, served both as mementvs and attes- 
tations of other legendary events; and the tombs of the heroes 
counted among the most powerful stimulants of mythical remin- 
iscence. The sceptre of Pelops and Agamemnon, still preserved 
in the days of Pausanias at Cheroneia in Boedtia, was the work 
of the god Héphestos. While many other alleged productions 
of the same divine hand were preserved in different cities of 
Greece, this is the only one which Pausanias himself believed to 
be genuine: it had been carried by Elektra, daughter of Aga- 
memno6n to Phékis, and received divine honors from the citizens 
of Cheroneia.4 The spears of Mérionés and Odysseus were treas- 
ured up at Engyium in Sicily, that of Achilles at Phasélis; the 
sword of Memnon adorned the temple of Asklépius at Nicomé- 
dia; and Pausanias, with unsuspecting confidence, adduces the 
two latter as proofs that the arms of the heroes were made of 
brass.5 The hide of the Kalydénian boar was guarded and shown 
by the Tegeates as a precious possession; the shield of Euphor- 
bus was in like manner suspended in the temple of Branchide 
near Milétus, as well as in the temple of Héré in Argos. Visible 





1 Herodot. viii. 134. ? Herodot. y. 67. 

* Buripid. Hippolyt. 1424; Pausan. ii. 32, 1; Lucian, De Dea Syria, . 
60. vol. iv. p- 287, Tauch. 

Tt is curious to see in the account of Pausanias how all the petty peculiar- 
ities of the objects around became connected with explanatory details grow 
ing out of this affecting legend. Compare Pausan. B22, 2, 

4 Pausan. ix. 40, 6. 

* Plutarch, Marcell. ¢. 20; Pausan. ii. 3, 6. 

VOL. I. 20 


458 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


relics of Epeius and Philoktétés were not wanting, while Straba 
raises his voice with indignation against the numerous Palladia 
which were shown in different cities, each pretending to be the 
genuine image from Troy.! It would be impossible to specify 
the number of chapels, sanctuaries, solemnities, foundations of 
one sort or another, said to have been first commenced by heroic 
or mythical personages, — by Héraklés, Jason, Médea, Alkmz6n, 
Diomédés, Odysseus, Danaus, and his daughters,? ete. Perhaps 
in some of these cases particular critics might raise objections, but 
the great bulk of the people entertained a firm and undoubted 
belief in the current legend. 

If we analyze the intellectual acquisitions of a common Gre- 
cian townsman, from the rude communities of Arcadia or Phékis 
even up to the enlightened Athens, we shall find that, over and 
above the rules of art or capacities requisite for his daily wants, 
it consisted chiefly of the various mythes connected with his gens, 
his city, his religious festivals, and the mysteries in which he 
might have chosen to initiate himself, as well as with the works of 
art and the more striking natural objects which he might see 
around him,— the whole set off and decorated by some knowl- 
edge of the epic and dramatic poets. Such was the intellectual 
and imaginative reach of an ordinary Greek, considered apart 
from the instructed few: it was an aggregate of religion, of so- 
cial and patriotic retrospect, and of romantic fancy, blended into 
one indivisible faith. And thus the subjective value of the 
mythes, looking at them purely as elements of Grecian thought 
and feeling, will appear indisputably great, however little there 
may be of objective reality, either historical or philosophical, 
discoverable under them. 

Nor must we omit the incalculable importance of the mythes 
as stimulants to the imagination of the Grecian artist in sculp- 
ture, in painting, in carving, and in architecture. From the 
divine and heroic legends and personages were borrowed those 





’ Pausan. viii. 46, 1; Diogen. Laér. viii. 5; Strabo; vi. p. 263; Appian, 
Bell. Mithridat. ¢. 77; Aischyl. Eumen. 380. 

Wachsmuth has collected the numerous citations out of Pausanias on this 
subject (Hellenisehe Alterthumskunde, part ii. sect. 115. p, 111). 

® Herodot. ii. 182; Plutarch, Pyrrh. ¢. 32; Schol. Apoll. Rhod iy. 1217: 
Diodér. iv. 56. 


a i pe er his | th li. 


MYTHES STIMULANTS TO GRECIAN ART. 459 


paintings, statues, and reliefs, which rendered the tempi's, por- 
ticos, and public buildings, at Athens and elsewhere, objects of 
surpassing admiration ; and such visible reproduction contributed 
again to fix the types of the gods and heroes familiarly and in. 
delibly on the public mind.! The figures delineated on cups and 
vases, as well as on the walls of private houses, were chiefly 
drawn from the same source —the mythes being the great store- 
house of artistic scenes and composition. 

To enlarge on the characteristic excellence of Grecian art 
would here be out of place: I regard it only in so far as, having 
originally drawn its materials from the mythes, it reacted upon 
the mythical faith and imagination—the reaction imparting 
strength to the former as well as distinctness to the latter. To 
one who saw constantly before him representations of the battles 
of the Centaurs or the Amazons,? of the exploits performed by 
Perseus and Bellerophon, of the incidents composing the Trojan 
war or the Kalydénian boar-hunt — the process of belief, even 
in the more fantastic of these conceptions, became easy in pro- 
portion as the conception was familiarized. And if any person 
had been slow to believe in the efficacy of the prayers of AZa- 
kus, whereby that devout hero once obtained special relief from 
Zeus, at a moment when Greece was perishing with long-con- 
tinued sterility, his doubts would probably vanish when, on visit- 
ing the AZakeium at ‘gina, there were exhibited to him the 
statues of the very envoys who had come on the behalf of the 
distressed Greeks to solicit that Aakus would pray for them.3 A 
Grecian temple was not simply a place of worship, but the 
actual dwelling-place of a god, who was believed to be introduced 
by the solemn dedicatory ceremony, and whom the imagination 
of the people identified in the most intimate manner with his 





1 "Huvdéov dperaic, the subjects of the works of Polygnotus at Athens 
(Melanthius ap. Plutarch. Cimon. c. 4): compare Theocrit. xy. 138, 

2 The Centauromachia and the Amazonomachia are constantly associated 
together in the ancient Grecian reliefs (see the Expedition Scientifique de 
Morée, t. ii. p. 16, in the explanation of the temple of Apollo Epikureius at 
Phigaleia). 

3 Pausan. ii. 29, 6. 

4 Ernst Curtius, Die Akropolis von Athen, Berlin, 1844, p. 18. Arnobit 
wiv. Gentes, vi. p 203, ed. Elmenhorst. 


200 HISiO%Y OF GREECK. 


statue. ‘The presence or removal of the statue was conceived aa 
identical with that of the being represented, — and while the 
statue was solemnly washed, dressed, and tended with all the re- 
spectful solicitude which would have been bestowed upon a real 
person,! miraculous tales were often rife respecting the manifesta- 
tion of real internal feeling in the wood and the marble. At 
perilous or critical moments, the statue was affirmed to have 
sweated, to have wept, to have closed its eyes, or brandished the 
spear in its hands, in token of sympathy or indignation.2 Such 
legends, springing up usually in times of suffering and danger, 
and finding few men bold enough openly to contradict them, ran 
in complete harmony with the general mythical faith, and tended 





1 See the case of the Aginetans lending the /Zakids for a time to the 
Thebans (Herodot. v. 80), who soon, however, returned them: likewise send- 
ing the ZZakids to the battle of Salamis (viii. 64-80). The Spartans, when 
they decreed that only one of their two kings should be out on military 
service, decreed at the same time that only one of the Tyndarids should go 
out with them (vy. 75): they once lent the Tyndarids as aids to the enyoys 
of Epizephyrian Locri, who prepared for them a couch on board their ship 
(Diodér. Excerpt. xvi. p. 15, Dindorf). The Thebans grant their hero 
Melanippus to Kleisthenés of Sikyén (vy. 68). What was sent, must proba- 
bly have been a consecrated copy of the genuine statue. 

Respecting the solemnities practised towards the statues, see Plutarch, 
Alkibiad. 34; Kallimach. Hymn. ad Lavacr. Palladis, init. with the note 
of Spanheim; K. O. Muller, Archxologie der Kunst, § 69; compare 
Plutarch, Question. Romaic. § 61. p. 279; and Tacit. Mor. Germ. ec. 40; 
Diodor. xvii. 49. 

The manner in which the real presence of a hero was identified with his 
statue (Tov diatov det Gedv olxor pévery odlovra Tod¢ idpvuévovc. — Menan- 
der, Fragm. ‘Hvioyoc, p. 71, Meineke), consecrated ground, and oracle, is 
nowhere more powerfally attested than in the Herotca of Philostratus (capp. 
2-20. pp. 674-692 ; also De Vit. Apollon. Tyan. iv. 11), respecting Protesi- 
laus at Eleus, Ajax at the Aianteium, and Hectér at Ilium: Prétesilans 
appeared exactly in the equipment of his statue, —xAayida ivprrat, féve, 
tov Oerradckdy tpbrov, Gorep kal Td dyadua roiro (p. 674). The presence 
and sympathy of the hero Lykus is essential to the satisfaction of the Athe- 
nian dikasts (Aristophan. Vesp. 389-820) : the fragment of Lucilius, quoted 
by Lactantius, De Fals4 Religione (i. 22), is curious. —Toze fpwat tote kara 
tiv réAw Kal riv yopav Ld pvwév ore (Lycurgus cont. Leocrat. c. 1). 

* Plutarch, Timoleon, c. 12; Strabo, vi. p. 264. Theophrastus treats tha 
perspiration as a natural phenomenon in the statues made of cedar-wood 
(Histor. Plant. v. 10). Plutarch discusses the credibility of this sort of 
miracles in his Life of Coriolanus, c. 37-38. 


a alee tet atin nN cei 


ANCIENT AND MODERN MYTHICAL VEIN. 461 


to strengthen it in all its various ramifications. The renewed 
activity of the god or hero both brought to mind and accredited 
the preéxisting mythes connected with hisname. When Boreas, 
during the invasion of Greece by Xerxés, and in compliance 
with the fervent prayers of the Athenians, had sent forth a provi 
dentiai storm, to the irreparable damage of the Persian armada,! 
the sceptical minority (alluded to by Plato), who doubted the 
mythe of Boreas and Oreithyia, and his close connection thus acs 
quired with Erechtheus, and the Erechtheids generally, must for 
the time have been reduced to absolute silence. 





CHAPTER XVII. 


THE GRECIAN MYTHICAL VEIN COMPARED WITH THAT OF 
MODERN EUROPE. 


I wave already remarked that the existence of that popula’ 
narrative talk, which the Germans express by the significant 
word Sage or Volks-Sage, in a greater or less degree of perfection 
or development, is a phenomenon common to almost all stages 
of society and to almost all quarters of the globe. It is the 
natural effusion of the unlettered, imaginative, and believing man, 
and its maximum of influence belongs to an early state of the 
human mind; for the multiplication of recorded facts, the diffu- 
sion of positive science, and the formation of a critical standard 
of belief, tend to discredit its dignity and to repress its easy and 





1 Herodot. vii. 189. Compare the gratitude of the Megalopolitans to 
Boreas for having preserved them from the attack of the Lacedzemonian king 
Agis (Pausan. viii. 27, 4.—viii. 36,4). When the Ten Thousand Greeks 
were on their retreat through the cold mountains of Armenia, Boreas blew 
in their faces,“ parching and freezing intolerably.” One of the prophets 
recommended that a sacrifice should be offered to him, which was done, 
“and the painful effect of the wind appeared to every one forthwith to cease 
in a marked manner;” (xa? zdat 6) repipavds tdose Ansar ta yadkewov vot 
nvetuaroc. — Xenoph. Anab. iv. 5, 3.) 


469 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


ad 


abundant flow. It supplies to the poet buth materials to recom- 
bine and adorn, and a basis as well as a stimulus for further in- 
ventions of his own; and this at a time when the poet is religious 
teacher, historian, and philosopher, all in one,—not, as he be- 
comes at a more advanced period, the mere purveyor of avowed, 
though interesting, fiction. 

Such popular stories, and such historical songs (meaning by 
historical, simply that which is acceptedas history) are found in 
most quarters of the globe, and especially among the Teutonic 
and Celtic populations of early Europe. The old Gothic songs 
were cast into a continuous history by the historian Ablavius ;1 
and the poems of the Germans respecting Tuisto the earth-born 
god, his son Mannus, and his descendants the eponyms of the va- 
rious German tribes,? as they are briefly described by Tacitus, 
remind us of Hesiod, or Eumélus, or the Homeric Hymns. 
Jacob Grimm, in his learned and valuable Deutsche Mythologie, 
has exhibited copious evidence of the great fundamental analogy, 
along with many special differences, between the German, Scan- 
dinavian, and Grecian mythical world; and the Dissertation of 
Mr. Price (prefixed to his edition of Warton’s History of En 
glish Poetry) sustains and illustrates Grimm’s view. The same 
personifying imagination — the same ever-present conception of 
the will, sympathies, and antipathies of the gods as the producing 
causes of phenomena, and as distinguished from a course of na- 
ture with its invariable sequence —the same relations between 
gods, heroes, and men, with the like difficulty of discriminating 
the one from the other in many individual names—a similar 
wholesale transfer of human attributes to the gods, with the ab- 
sence of human limits and liabilities — a like belief in Nymphs, 
Giants, and other beings, neither gods nor men —the same co- 
alescence of the religious with the patriotic feeling and faith 
— these are positive features common to the early Greeks with 
the early Germans: and the negative conditions of the two 





1 Jornandes, De Reb. Geticis, capp. 4-6. 

* Tacit. Mor. German. c. 2.“ Celebrant carminibus antiquis, quod unum 
apud eos memorize et annalium genus est, Tuistonem Deum terra editum, et 
filium Mannum, originem gentis conditoresque. Quidam licentid vetustatis, 
plures Deo ortos, pluresque gentis appellationes, Marsos, Gambrivios, Sue 
vos, Vandaliosque affirmant: eaque vera et antiqua nomina.” 


- 


MYTHES AMONG THE EARLY GERMANS. 463 


are not less analogous —the absence of prose writiug, positive 
records, and scientific culture. The preliminary basis and 
encouragements for the mythopeeic faculty were thus extremely 
similar. 

But though the prolific forces were the same in kind, the re- 
sults were very different in degree, and the developing circum. 
stances were more different still. 

First, the abundance, the beauty, and the long continuance of 
early Grecian poetry, in the purely poetical age, is a phenome- 
non which has no parallel elsewhere. 

Secondly, the transition of the Greek mind from its poetical to 
its comparatively positive state was self-operated, accomplished 
by its own inherent and expansive force — aided indeed, but by 
no means either impressed or provoked, from without. From the 
poetry of Homer, to the history of Thucydidés and the philoso- 
phy of Plato and Aristotle, was a prodigious step, but it was the 
native growth of the Hellenic youth into an Hellenic man; and 
what is of still greater moment, it was brought about without 
breaking the thread either of religious or patriotic tradition — 
without any coercive innovation or violent change in the mental 
feelings. The legendary world, though the ethical judgments and 
rational criticisms of superior men had outgrown it, still retained 
its hold upon their feelings as an object of affectionate and reve- 
rential retrospect. 

Far different from this was the development of the early Ger- 
mans. We know little about their early poetry, but we shall run 
no risk of error in affirming that they had nothing to compare 
with either Iliad or Odyssey. Whether, if left to themselves, 
they would have possessed sufficient progressive power to make 
a step similar to that of the Greeks, is a question which we 
cannot answer. ‘Their condition, mental as well as_political, was 
violently changed by a foreign action from without. The in- 
fluence of the Roman empire introduced artificially among them 
new institutions, new opinions, habits, and luxuries, and, above 
all, a new religion; the Romanized Germans becoming them- 
selves successively the instruments of this revolution with regard 
to such of their brethren as still remained heathen. It was a 
revolution often brought about by penal and coercive means: the 


464 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


old gods Thor and Woden were formally deposed and renounced, 
their images were crumbled into dust, and the sacred oaks of 
worship and prophecy hewn down. But even where conver- 
sion was the fruit of preaching and persuasion, it did not the less 
break up all the associations of a German with respect to, that 
mythical world which he called his past, and of which the ancient 
gods constituted both the charm and the sanctity: he had now 
only the alternative of treating them either as men or as demons.! 
That mixed religious and patriotic retrospect, formed by the 
coalescence of piety with ancestral feeling, which constituted the 
appropriate sentiment both of Greeks and of Germans towards 
their unrecorded antiquity, was among the latter banished by 
Christianity: and while the root of the old mythes was thus 
cankered, the commemorative ceremonies and customs with which 
they were connected, cither lost their consecrated character or 
disappeared altogether. Moreover, new influences of great im- 
portance were at the same time brought to bear. The Latin 
language, together with some tinge of Latin literature — the habit 
of writing and of recording present events — the idea of a sys- 
tematic law and pacific adjudication of disputes, — all these form 
ed a part of the general working of Roman civilization, even after 
the decline of the Roman empire, upon the Teutonic and Celtic 





On the hostile influence exercised by the change of religion on the old 
Scandinavian poetry, see an interesting article of Jacob Grimm in the Got- 
tingen Gelehrte Anzeigen, Feb. 1830, pp. 268-273 ; a review of Olaf Tryggyv- 
son’s Saga. The article Helden, in his Deutsche Mythologie, is also full of 
instruction on the same subject: see also the Einleitung to the book, p. 11, 
2nd edition. 

A similar observation has been made with respect to the old mythes of 
the pagan Russians by Eichhoff: “ L’établissement du Christianisme, ce 
gage du bonheur des nations, fut vivement apprécié par les Russes, qui dans 
leur juste reconnaissance, le personnifitrent dans un héros. Vladimir le 
Grand, ami.des arts, protecteur de la religion qu’il protégea, et dont les 
fruits firent oublier les fautes, devint l’Arthus et le Charlemagne de la Rus- 
sie, et ses hauts faits furent un mythe national qui domina tous ceux du 
paganisme. Autour de lui se groupérent ces guerriers aux formes athléti- 
ques, au coeur généreux, dont la poésie aime & entourer le berceau mystéri- 
eux des peuples: et les exploits du vaillant Dobrinia, de Rogdai, d’Ilia, de 
Curilo, animérent les ballades nationales, et vivent encore dans de natfi 
récits.” (Eichhoff, Histoire de la Langue et Littérature des Slaves, Paris, 
1839, part iii. ch. 2. p. 190.) 





SARLY GERMAN GENEALOGIES TO ODIN. 465 


tribes. A class of specially-educated men was formed, upon s 
Latin basis and upon Christian principles, consisting too almost 
entirely of priests, who were opposed, as well by motives of rival- 
ry as by religious feeling, to the ancient bards and storytellers of 
the community: the “ lettered men”! were constituted apart from 
“the men of story,” and Latin literature contributed along with 
religion to sink the mythes of untaught heathenism. Charle- 
magne, indeed, at the same time that he employed aggressive and 
violent proceedings to introduce Christianity among the Saxons, 
also took special care to commit to writing and preserve the old 
heathen songs. But there can be little doubt that this step was 
the suggestion of a large and enlightened understanding peculiar 
to himself. The disposition general among lettered Christians 
of that age is more accurately represented by his son Louis le 
Debonnaire, who, having learned these songs as a boy, came to 
abhor them when he arrived at mature years, and could’ never 
be induced either to repeat or tolerate them.? 

According to the old heathen faith, the pedigree of the Saxon, 
Anglian, Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish kings, — probably also 
those of the German and Scandinavian kings generally, — was 
traced to Odin, or to some of his immediate companions or heroic 
sons.s I have already observed that the value of these genealo- 





! This distinction is curiously brought to view by Saxo Grammaticus, 
where he says of an Englishman named Lucas, that he was “ literis quidem 
tenuiter instructus, sed historiarum scientid apprime eruditus” (p. 330, apud 
Dahlmann’s Historische Forschungen, vol. i. p. 176). 

2 “Barbara et antiquissima carmina (says Eginhart, in his Life of Charle- 
magne), quibus veterum regum actus et bella canebantur, conscripsit.” 

Theganus says of Louis le Debonnaire, “ Poetica carmina gentilia, qu” 
in juventute didicerat, respuit, nec legere, nec audire, nec docere, voluit 
(De Gestis Ludovici Imperatoris ap. Pithceum, p. 304, c. xix.) 

5 See Grimm’s Deutsche Mythologie, art. Helden, p. 356, 2nd edit. Hen 
gist and Horsa were fourth in descent from Odin (Venerable Bede, Hist. i 
15). Thiodolff, the Scald of Harold Haarfager king of Norway, traced the 
pedigree of his sovereign through thirty generations to Yngarfrey, the son 
of Niord, companion of Odin at Upsal; the kings of Upsal were called Yng- 
linger, and the song of Thiodolff, Ynglingatal (Dahlmann, Histor. Forschung, 
i. p. 379). Eyvind, another Scald, a century afterwards, deduced the pedi- 
gree of Jarl Hacon from Saming, son of Yngwifrey (p. 381). Are Frode, 
the Icelandic historian, carried up his own genealogy through thirty-six 
generations to Yngwe; a genealogy which Torfsus accepts as trustworthy 

VOL. I. 20* 


466 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


gies consisted not so much in their length, as in the reverenea 
attached to the name serving as primitive source. After the 
worship attached to Odin had been extinguished, the genealogi- 
cal line was lengthened up to Japhet or Noah,—and Odin, no 
longer accounted worthy to stand at the top, was degraded into 
one of the simple human members of it.1 And we find this 
alteration of the original mythical genealogies to have taken 
place even among the Scandinavians, although the introduction 
of Christianity was in those parts both longer deferred, so as to 





opposing it to the line of kings given by Saxo Grammaticus (p. 352). Tor- 
feeus makes Harold Haarfager a descendant from Odin through twenty-seven 
generations; Alfred of England through twenty-three generations; Offa of 
Mercia through fifteen (p. 362). See also the translation by Lange of P. A. 
Miiller’s Saga Bibliothek, Introd. p. xxviii. and the genealogical tables pre- 
fixed to Snorro Sturleson’s Edda. 

Mr. Sharon Turner conceives the human existence of Odin to be distinct- 
ly proved, seemingly upon the same evidence as Euémerus believed in the 
human existence of Zeus (History of the Anglo-Saxons, Appendix to b. ii. 
ch, 3. p. 219, 5th edit). 

1 Dahlmann, Histor. Forschung. t. i. p. 220. There is a valuable article 
on this subject in the Zeitschrift fiir Gesclichts Wissenschaft (Berlin, vol. i. 
pp. 237-282) by Stuhr, “ Uber einige Hauptfragen des Nordischen Alterthums,” 
wherein the writer illustrates both the strong motive and the effective ten- 
dency, on the part of the Christian clergy who had to deal with these newly- 
converted Teutonic pagans, to Euémerize the old gods, and to represent a 
genealogy, which they were unable to efface from men’s minds, as if it con 
sisted only of mere men. 

Mr. John Kemble (Uber die Stammtafel der Westsachsen, ap. Stuhr, p. 
254) remarks, that “ nobilitas,” among that people, consisted in descent from 
Odin and the other gods, 

Colonel Sleeman also deals in the same manner with the religious legends 
of the Hindoos,—so natural is the proceeding of Euémerus, towards any 
religion in which a critic does not believe: — 

“ They (the Hindoos) of course think that the incarnation of their three 
great divinities were beings infinitely superior to prophets, being in all their 
attributes and prerogatives equal to the divinities themselves. But we are 
disposed to think that these incarnations were nothing more than great men whom 
their flatterers and poets have exalted into gods,— this was the way in which men 
made their gods in ancient Greece and Egypt.— All that the poets have sung 
of the actions of these men is now received as revelation from heaven: 
though nothing can be more monstrous than the actions ascribed to the best 
Incarnation, Krishna, of the best of the gods, Vishnoo.” (Sleeman, Rambles 
and Recollections of an Indian Official, vol. i. ch. viii. 61.) 











SCANDINAVIAN SCALDS. 467 


leave time for a more ample development of ‘the heathen poetical: 
vein —and seems to have created a less decided feeling of anti 
pathy (especially in Iceland) towards the extinct faith! The 
poems and tales composing the Edda, though first committed to 
writing after the period of Christianity, do not present the ancient 
gods in a point of view intentionally odious or degrading. 

The transposition above alluded to, of the genealogical root 
from Odin to Noah, is the more worthy of notice, as it illustrates 
the genuine character of these genealogies, and shows that they 
sprung, not from any erroneous historical data, but from the turn 
of the religious feeling; also that their true value is derived 
from their being taken entire, as connecting the existing race of 
men with a divine original. If we could imagine that Grecian 
paganism had been superseded by Christianity in the year 500 
B.C., the great and venerated gentile genealogies of Greece would 
have undergone the like modification; the Herakleids, Pelopids, 
Jakids, Asklepiads, &c., would have been merged in some larger 
aggregate branching out from the archeology of the Old Testa- 
ment. The old heroic legends connected with these ancestral 
names would either have been forgotten, or so transformed as to 
suit the new vein of thought; for the altered worship, ceremo- 
nies, and customs would have been altogether at variance with 
them, and the mythical feeling would have ceased to dwell upon 
those to whom prayers were no longer offered. If the oak of 
Dédona had been cut down, or the Thedric ship had ceased to be 
sent from Athens to Délos, the mythes of Theseus and of the two 
black doves would have lost their pertinence, and died away. As 
it was, the change from Homer to Thucydidés and Aristotle took 
place internally, gradually, and imperceptibly. Philosophy and 
history were superinduced in the minds of the superior few, but 
the feelings of the general public continued unshaken— the sa- 
cred objects remained the same both to the eye and to the heart 





1 See P. E. Miiller, Uber den Ursprung und Verfall der Islandischen 
Historiographie, p. 63. 

In the Leitfaden zur Nordischen Alterthumskunde, pp. 4-5 (Copenhagen, 
1837), is an instructive summary of the different schemes of interpretation 
applied to the northern mythes: 1, the historical; 2, the geographical; 3 
the astronomical; 4, the physical: 5, the allegorical. 


468 HISTORY OF GREECR 


—and the worship of the ancient gods was even adornel by new 
architects and sculptors who greatly strengthened its imposing 
effect. 

While then in Greece the mythopeic stream continued in the 
same course, only with abated current and influence, in modern 
Europe its ancient bed was blocked up, and it was turned into 
new and divided channels. The old religion — though as an as- 
cendent faith, unanimously and publicly manifested, it became 
extinct — still continued in detached scraps and fragments, and 
under various alterations of name and form. The heathen gods 
and goddesses, deprived as they were of divinity, did not pass 
out of the recollection and fears of their former worshippers, but 
were sometimes represented (on principles like those of Euéme- 
rus) as haying been eminent and glorious men— sometimes de- 
graded into demons, magicians, elfs, fairies, and other supernatural 
agents, of an inferior grade and generally mischievous cast. 
Christian writers, such as Saxo Grammaticus and Snorro Stur- 
leson, committed to writing the ancient oral songs of the Scandiy- 
ian Scalds, and digested the events contained in them into contin- 
uous narrative — performing in this respect a task similar to that 
of the Grecian logographers Pherekydés and Hellanikus, in 
reference to Hesiod and the Cyclic poets. But while Pherekydés 
and Hellanikus compiled under the influence of feelings substan- 
tially the same as those of the poeis on whom they bestowed 
their care, the Christian logographers felt it their duty to point out 
the Odin and Thor of the old Scalds as evil demons, or cunning 
enchanters, who had fascinated the minds of men into a false belief 
in their divinity.1. In some cases, the heathen recitals and ideas 





1 Interea tamen homines Christiani in numina non credant ethnica, nec 
aliter fidem narrationibus hisce adstruere vel adhibere debent, quam in libri 
hujus procemio monitum est de causis et occasionibus cur et quomodo genus 
humanum a vera fide aberraverit.” (Extract from the Prose Edda, p. 75, 
in the Lexicon Mythologicum ad caleem Eddx Semund. vol. iii. p. 357, Co- 
penhag. edit.) 

A similar warning is to be found in another passage cited by P. E. Miller 
Uber den Ursprung und V2rfall der Islindischen Historiographie, p. 138 
Copenhagen, 1813; compare the Prologue to the Prose Edda, p. 6, and Mal- 
let, Introduction 4 Histoire de Dannemare, ch. vii. pp. 114-132. 

Saxo Grammaticus represents Odin sometimes as a magician, sometimea 
%3 an evil demon, sometimes as a high priest or pontiff of heathenism, who 


LEGENDS OF THE SAINTS. 469 


were modified so as to suit Christian feeling. But when preserved 
without such a change, they exhibited themselves palpably, and 
were designated by their compilers, as at variance with the reli- 
gious belief of the people, and as associated either with impos- 
ture or with evil spirits. 

A new vein of sentiment had arisen in Europe, unsuitable in- 
dzed to the old mythes, yet leaving still in force the demand for 
mythical narrative generally. And this demand was satisfied, 
speaking generally, by two classes of narratives,—the legends 
of the Catholic Saints and the Romances of Chivalry, corre- 
sponding to two types of character, both perfectly accommodated 
to the feelings of the time,— the saintly ideal and the chivalrous 
ideal. 

Both these two classes of narrative correspond, in character as- 
well as in general purpose, to the Grecian mythes — being sto- 
ries accepted as realities, from their full conformity with the pre- 
dispositions and deep-seated faith of an uncritical audience, and 
prepared beforehand by their authors, not with any reference to 





imposed so powerfully upon the people around him as to receive divine hon- 
ors. ‘Thor also is treated as having been an evil demon, (See Lexicon 
Mythologic. ut supra, pp. 567, 915.) 

Respecting the function of Snorro as logographer, see Preefat. ad Eddam, 
at supra, p. xi. Heis much more faithful, and less unfriendly to the old re- 
ligion, than the other logographers of the ancient Scandinavian Sagas. (Leit- 
faden der Nordischen Alterthiimer, p. 14, by the Antiquarian Society of 
Copenhagen, 1837.) 

By a singular transformation, dependent upon the same tone of mind, the 
authors of the French Chansons de Geste, in the twelfth century, turned 
Apollo into an evil demon, patron of the Mussulmans (see the Roman of 
Garin le Loherain, par M. Paulin Paris, 1833, p. 31): “ Car mieux vaut Diex 
que ne fait Apollis.” M. Paris observes, “Cet ancien Dieu des beaux arts 
est l’un des démons le plus souvent désignés dans nos poémes, comme patron 
des Musulmans.” 

The prophet Mahomet, too, anathematized the old Persian epic anterior to 
his religion. “C’estal’occasion de Naser Ibn al-Hareth, qui avait apporté de 
Perse Histoire de Rustem et d’Isfendiar, et la faisait réciter par des chan- 
teuses dans les assemblées des Koreischites, que Mahomet prononga le vers 
suivant (of the Koran): Il y a des hommes qui achetent des contes frivoles, 
pour détourner par-la les hommes de la voie de Dieu, d’une manitreinsens¢e, 
et pour la livrer 4 la risée: mais leur puniton les couvrira de honte.’ 
(Mohl, Préface au Livre des Rois de Ferdoasi, p. xiii.) 


470 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


the conditions of historical proof, but for the purpose of calling 
forth sympathy, emotion, or reverence. The type of the saintly 
character belongs to Christianity, being the history of Jesus 
Christ as described in the gospels, and that of the prophets in 
the Old Testament; whilst the lives of holy men, who acquired 
a religious reputation from the fourth to the fourteenth century 
of the Christian wera, were invested with attributes, and illustrated 
with ample details, tending to assimilate them to this revered 
model. ‘The numerous miracles, the cure of diseases, the expul- 
sion of demons, the temptations and sufferings, the teachings 
and commands, with which the biography of Catholic saints 
abounds, grew chiefly out of this pious feeling, common to the 
writer and to his readers. Many of the other incidents, recounted 
in the same performances, take their rise from misinterpreted al- 
legories, from ceremonies and customs of which it was pleasing 
to find a consecrated origin, or from the disposition to convert the 
etymology of a name into matter of history: many have also been 
suggested by local peculiarities, and by the desire of stimulating 
or justifying the devotional emotions of pilgrims who visited some 
consecrated chapel or image. The dove was connected, in the 
faith of the age, with the Holy Ghost, the serpent with Satan; 
lions, wolves, stags, unicorns, ete. were the subjects of other em- 
blematic associations ; and such modes of belief found expression 
for themselves in many narratives which brought the saints into 
conflict or conjoint action with these various animals. Legends 
of this kind, so indefinitely multiplied and so preéminently pop- 
ular and affecting, in the Middle Ages, are not exaggerations of 
particular matters of fact, but emanations in detail of some cur- 
rent faith or feeling, which they served to satisfy, and by which 
they were in turn amply sustained and accredited.! 





' The legends of the Saints have been touched upon by M. Guizot (Cours 
d’Histoire Moderne, lecon xvii.) and by M. Ampére (Histoire Littéraire de la 
France, t. ii. cap. 14, 15, 16); but a far more copious and elaborate account 
of them, coupled with much just criticism, is to be found in the valuable 
Essai sur les Légendes Pieuses du Moyen Age, par L. F. Alfred Maury, 
Paris, 1843. 

M. Guizot scarcely adverts at all to the more or less of matter of fact con 
tained in these biographies : he regards them altogether as they grew out of 
and answered to the predominant emotions and mental exigences of the age: 
* Au milieu d’un Céluge de fables absurdes, la morale éclate avec un gran4 


LEGENDS OF THE SAINTS. 471 


Every reader of Pausanias will recognize the great general 
analogy between the stories recounted to him at the temples 
which he visited, and these legends of the Middle Ages. Though 
the type of character which the latter illustrate is indeed mate- 
rially different, yet the source as well as the circulation, the gen- 
erating as well as the sustaining forces, were in both cases the 
same. Such legends were the natural growth of a religious faith, 





empire ” (p. 159, ed. 1829). “ Les légendes ont été pour les Chrétiens de ce 
temps (qu’on me permette cette comparaison purement littéraire) ce que sont 
pour les Orientaux ces longs récits, ces histoires si brillantes et si variées, 
dont les Mille et une Nuits nous donnent un échantillon. C’était 14 que 
Pimagination populaire errait librement dans un monde inconnu, merveil- 
leux, plein de mouvement et de poésie” (p. 175, ibid). 

M. Guizot takes his comparison with the tales of the Arabian Nights, as 
heard by an Oriental with uninquiring and unsuspicious credence. Viewed 
with reference to an instructed European, who reads these narratives as 
pleasing but recognized fiction, the comparison would not be just; for no one 
in that age dreamed of questioning the truth of the biographies. All the 
remarks of M. Guizot assume this implicit faith in them as literal histories: 
perhaps, in estimating the feelings to which they owed their extraordinary 
popularity, he allows too little predominance to the religious feeling, and too 
much influence to other mental exigences which then went along with it; 
more especially as he remarks, in the preceding lecture (p. 116), “ Le carac- 
vére général de l'epoque est la concentration du développement intellectuel 
dans la sphere religieuse.” 

How this absorbing religious sentiment operated in generating and accred- 
iting new matter of narrative, is shown with great fulness of detail in the 
work of M. Maury: “Tous les écrits du moyen dge nous apportent la 
preuve de cette préoccupation exclusive des esprits vers l’Histoire Sainte et 
les prodiges qui avaient signalé l’avénement du Christianisme. Tous nous 
montrent la pensée de Dieu et du Ciel, dominant les moindres ceuvres de 
cette poque de natve et de crédule simplicité. D’ailleurs, n’étaite-ce pas le 
moine, le clere, qui constituaient alors les seuls écrivains? Qu’y a-t-il 
@étonnant que le sujet habituel de leurs méditations, de leurs études, se 
reflétat sans cesse dans leurs ouvrages? Partoutreparaissait 4 l'imagination 
Jésus et ses Saints: cette image, l’esprit l’accueillait avec soumission et 
obéissance : il n’osait pas encore envisager ces célestes pensées avec l’ceil de 
la critique, armé de défiance et de doute; au contraire, l’intelligence les 
acceptait toutes indistinctement et s’en nourrissait avec avidité. Ainsi s’ac- 
eréditaient tous les jours de nouvelles fables. Une foi vive veut sans cesse de 
nouveaux fuits qu'elle puisse croire, comme la charité veut de nouveaux bien- 
faits pours s’exercer” (p. 43). The remarks on the History of St. Christo- 
pher, whose perscnality was allegorized by ~ather and Melancthon, are 
curious (p. 57). 


472 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


earnest, unexamining, and izterwoven with the feelings at atime 
when the reason does not need to be cheated. The lives of the 
Saints bring us even back to the simple and ever-operative theo 
logy of the Homeric age; so constantly is the hand of God ex 
hibited even in the minutest details, for the succor of a favored 
individual,—so completely is the scientific point of view, re- 
specting the phenomena of nature, absorbed into the religious.! 
During the intellectual vigor of Greece and Rome, a sense of the 
invariable course of nature and of the scientific explanation of 
phenomena had been created among the superior minds, and 
through them indirectly among the remaining community; thus 
limiting to a certain extent the ground open to be occupied by a 
religious legend. With the decline of the pagan literature and 
philosophy, before the sixth century of the Christian era, this 
scientific conception gradually passed out of sight, and left the 
mind free to a religious interpretation of nature not less simple 
and naif than that which had prevailed under the Homeric pa- 
ganism.2_ The great religious movement of the Reformation, and 





1“ Dans les prodiges que l’on admettait avoir di nécessairement s’opérer 
au tombeau du saint nouvellement canonisé, l’expression, ‘Ceci yvisum, 
claudi gressum, muti loquelam, surdi auditum, paralytici debitum membro 
rum officium, recuperabant, était devenue plitot une formule d’usage que la 
rélation littérale du fait.” (Maury, Essai sur les Légendes Pieuses da 
Moyen Age, p. 5.) 

To the same purpose M. Ampére, ch. 14. p. 361: “Il y a un certain nom- 
bre de faits que l’agiographie reproduit constamment, quelque soit son héros: 
ordinairement ce persounage a eu dans sa jeunesse une vision qui lui a 
révélé son avenir: ou bien, une prophétie Jui a annoncé ce qu’il serait un 
jour. Plus tard, il opere un certain nombre de miracles, toujours les 
mémes ; il exorcise des possédés, ressuscite des morts, il est averti de sa fim 
par un songe. Puis sur son tombeau s’accomplissent d’autres merveilles 
a-peu-prés semblables.” 

? A few words from M. Ampére to illustrate this: “ C’est donc au sixiéme 
siécle que la légende se constitue: c’est alors qu’elle prend complétement le 
caractére naif qui lui appartient: qu’elle est elle-méme, qu’elle se sépare de 
toute influence étrangére. En méme temps, l’ignorance devient de plus em 

+ plus grossiére, et par suite la crédulité s’accroit: les calamités du temps sent 
plus lourdes, et on aun plus grand besoin de reméde et de consolation 
Seles cen Les récits miraculeux se substituent aux argumens de la théologie. 
Les miracles sont devenus la meilleure démonstration du Christianisme ' 
e’est la seule que puissent comprendre les esprits grossiers des barbares” (c. 
15. p. 373). 

Again, c. 17. p. 401: “Un des caracttres de la légende est de méler con 


LEGENDS OF THE SAINTS. 473 


the gradual formation of critical and philosophical habits in the 
modern mind, have caused these legends of the Saints, — once 





stamment le puéril au grand: il faut l’avouer, elle défigure parfois un peu 
ces hommes d’une trempe si forte, en mettant sur leur compte des anecdotes 
dont le caractére n’est pas toujours sérieux; elle en a usé ainsi pour St. 
Columban, dont nous verrons tout 4 Vheure le réle vis-d-vis de Brunehaut 
et des chefs Mérovingiens. La légende auroit pu se dispenser de nous 
apprendre, comment un jour, il se fit rapporter par un corbeau les gants 
qu'il avait perdus: comment, un autre jour, il empécha la bitre de couler 
dun tonneau percé, et diverses merveilles, certainement indignes de sa 
mémoire.” 

The miracle by which St. Columban employed the raven to fetch back his 
lost gloves, is exactly in the character of the Homeric and Hesiodic age: the 
earnest faith, as well as the reverential sympathy, between the Homeric man 
and Zeus or Athéné, is indicated by the invocation of their aid for his own 
sufferings of detail, and in his own need and danger. The criticism of M. 
Ampére, on the other hand, is analogous to that of the later pagans, after 
the conception of a course of nature had become established in men’s minds, 
so far as that exceptional interference by the gods was understood to be, 
comparatively speaking, rare, and only supposable upon what were called 
great emergences. 

In the old Hesiodic legend (see above, ch. ix. p. 245), Apollo is apprized 
by a raven of the infidelity of the nymph Korénis to him — 76 pév dp’ dyye- 
Aog HAG Képaé, etc. (the raven appears elsewhere as companion of Apollo, 
Plutarch. de Isid. et Os. p. 379, Herod. iv. 15.) Pindar, in his version of the 
legend, eliminated the raven, without specifying how Apollo got his knowl 
edge of the cireumstance. The Scholiasts praise Pindar much for having 
rejected the puerile version of the story —#ma:vei rdv Tlivdapov 6 ’Aprépwv 
bre mapakpovoipuevoc Thy wep Tov Kéoaka icropiav, abtoy dv éavTod éyvuxé- 
vat onot Tov "ATOAAW.........xXaipety ody daca TH ToL0bTH pidy TELE w¢ 
évrTt Anp det, ete. — compare also the criticisms of the Schol. ad Soph. 
C£dip. Kol. 1378, on the old epic Thebais; and the remarks of Arrian 
(Exp. Al. iii. 4) on the divine interference by which Alexander and his 
army were enabled to find their way across the sand of the desert to the 
temple of Ammon. 

Tn the eyes of M. Ampére, the recital of the biographer of St. Columban 
appears puerile (oizw idov de Geoic dvagavda gideivrag, Odyss. iii. 221); 
in the eyes of that biographer, the criticism of M. Ampére would have ap- 
peared impious. Whenit is once conceded that phenomena are distributa 
ble under two denominations, the natural and the miraculous, it must be left 
to the feelings of each individual to determine what is and what is not, a 
suitable occasion for a miracle. Diodérus and Pausanias differed in opinion 
(as stated in a previous chapter) about the death of Actwén by his own 
bounds,— the former maintaining that the case was one fit for the special] 
imtervention of the goddess Artemis; the latter, that it was not so. Th 


474 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


the charm and cherished creed of a numerous public,! to pass 
altogether out of credit, without even being regarded, among 
Protestants at least, as worthy of a formal scrutiny into the evi- 
dence, —a proof of the transitory value of public belief, how- 
ever sincere and fervent, as a certificate of historical truth, if it 
be blended with religious predispositions. 





question is one determinable only by the religious feelings and conscience of 
the two dissentients: no common standard of judgment can be imposed upon 
them; for no reasonings derived from science or philosophy are ayailable, inas- 
much as in this case the very point in dispute is, whether the scientific point 
of view be admissible. Those who are disposed to adopt the supernatural 
belief, will find in every case the language open to them wherewith Diony- 
sius of Halicarnassus (in recounting a miracle wrought by Vesta, in the 
early times of Roman history, for the purpose of rescuing an unjustly 
accused virgin) reproves the sceptics of his time: “It is well worth while 
(he observes) to recount the special manifestation (é:¢davevay) which the 
goddess showed to these unjustly accused virgins. For these circumstances, 
extraordinary as they are, have been held worthy of belief by the Romans, 
and historians have talked much about them. ‘Those persons, indeed, who 
adopt the atheistical schemes of philosophy (if, indeed, we must call them 
philosophy), pulling in pieces as they do all the special manifestions (dmacag 
Avacipovres tag éxipaveiag tTOv YeGv) of the gods which have taken place 
among Greeks or barbarians, will of course turn these stories also into ridi 
cule, ascribing them to the vain talk of men, as if none of the gods cared at 
all for mankind. But those who, having pushed their researches farther, 
helieve the gods not to be indifferent to human affairs, but favorable to good 
men and hostile to bad — will not treat these special manifestations as more 
incredible than others.” (Dionys. Halic. ii. 68-69.) Plutarch, after noticing 
the great number of miraculous statements in circulation, expresses his 
anxiety to draw a line between the true and the false, but cannot find 
where: “excess, both of credulity and of incredulity (he tells us) in such 
matters is dangerous; caution, and nothing too much, is the best course.” 
(Camillus, c. 6.) Polybius is for granting permission to historians to recount 
a sufficient number of miracles to keep up a feeling of piety in the multi 
tude, but not more: to measure out the proper quantity (he observes) is 
difficult, but not impossible (dvorapaypagég éoriv % mocbty¢, ob phy drapa- 
ypagveg ye, xvi. 12). 

‘The great Bollandist. collection of the Lives of the Saints, intended to 
comprise the whole year, did not extend beyond the nine months from 
January to October, which occupy fifty-three large volumes. The month 
of April fills three of those volumes, and exhibits the lives of 1472 saints 
Had the collection run over the entire year, the total number of such biog 
raphies could hardly have been less than 25,000, and might have been even 
greater (see Guizot, Cours d’Histoire Moderne, legon xvii. p. 1571 


a 





LEGENDS OF CHIVALRY. 475 


‘The same mythopeeic vein, and the same susceptibility and 

* facility of belief, which had created both supply and demand for 
the legends of the Saiuts, also provided the abundant stock of 
romanti¢ narrative poetry, in amplification and illustration of the 
chivalrous ideal. What the legends of Troy, of Thébes, of the 
Kalydénian boar, of C&dipus, Théseus, etc. were to an early 
Greek, the tales of Arthur, of Charlemagne, of the Niebelungen, 
were to an Englishman, or Frenchman, or German, of the twelfth 
or thirteenth century. They were neither recognized fiction nor 
authenticated history: they were history, as it is felt and wel- 
comed by minds unaccustomed to investigate evidence, and un- 
conscious of the necessity of doing so. That the Chronicle of 
Turpin, a mere compilation of poetical legends respecting Charle- 
magne, was accepted as genuine history, and even pronounced to 
be such by papal authority, is well known; and the authors of 
the Romances announce themselves, not less than those of the 
old Grecian epic, as being about to recount real matter of fact.! 
{t is certain that Charlemagne is a great historical name, and it 





1 See Warton’s History of English Poetry, vol.i. dissert.i. p. xvii. Again, 
in sect. iii. p. 140: “Vincent de Beauvais, who lived under Louis IX. of 
France (about 1260), and who, on account of his extraordinary erudition, 
was appointed preceptor to that king’s sons, very gravely classes Archbishop 
Turpin’s Charlemagne among the real histories, and places it on a level 
with Suetonius and Casar. He was himself an historian, and has left a 
large history of the world, fraught with a variety of reading, and of high 
repute in the Middle Ages; but edifying and entertaining as this work might 
have been to his contemporaries, at present it serves only to record their 
prejudices and to characterize their credulity.”. About the full belief in 
Arthur and the Tales of the Round Table during the fourteenth century, 
and about the strange historical mistakes of the poet Gower in the fifteenth, 
see the same work, sect. 7. vol. ii. p. 833; sect. 19. vol. ii. p. 239. 

_“Tauteur de la Chronique de Turpin (says M. Sismondi, Littérature du 
Midi, yol. i. ch. 7. p. 289) n’avait point Vintention de briller aux yeux du 
public par une invention heureuse, ni d’amuser Jes oisifs par des contes mer- 
veilleux qwils reconnoitroient pour tels: il présentait aux Frangais tous ces 
faits étranges comme de histoire, et la lecture des légendes fabuleuses avait 
accoutumé & croire & de plus grandes merveilles encore; aussi plusieurs de 
ees fables furent elles reproduites dans la Chronique de St. Denis.” 

Again, ib. p. 290: * Souvent les anciens romanciers, lorsqu’ils entreprennent 
un récit de la cour de Charlemagne, prennent un ton plus élevé: ce ne sont 
point des fables qu’ils vont colter, c’est de V’histoire nationale, ~ c’est la 


476 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


is possible, though not certain, that the name of Arthur may be 
historical also. But the Charlemagne of history, and the Charle- 
magne of romance, have little except the name in common nor 
could we ever determine, except by independent evidence (which 
in this case we happen to possess), whether Charlemagne was 
a real or a fictitious person.!. That illustrious name, as well as 
the more problematical Arthur, is taken up by the romancers, not 
with a view to celebrate realities previously verified, but for the 
purpose of setting forth or amplifying an ideal of their own, in 
such manner as both to rouse the feelings and captivate the faith 
of their hearers. 

To inquire which of the personages of the Carlovingian epic 
were real and which were fictitious, — to examine whether the 
expedition ascribed to Charlemagne against Jerusalem had ever 
taken place or not, — to separate truth from exaggeration in the 
exploits of the Knights of the Round Table, — these were prob- 





gloire de leurs ancétres qu’ils veulent célébrer, et ils ont droit alors 4 deman- 
der qu’on les écoute avec respect.” 

The Chronicle of Turpin was inserted, even so late as the year 1566, in 
the collection printed by Scardius at Frankfort of early German historians 
(Ginguené, Histoire Littéraire d’Italie, vol. iv. part ii. ch. 3. p. 157). 

To the same point — that these romances were listened to as real stories 
—see Sir Walter Scott’s Preface to Sir Tristram, p. lxvii. The authors of 
the Legends of the Saints are not less explicit in their assertions that every- 
thing which they recount is true and well-attested (Ampere, c. 14. p. 358). 

The series of articles by M. Fauriel, published in the Revue des Deux 
Mondes, vol. xiii. are full of instruction respecting the origin, tenor, and 
influence of the Romances of Chivalry. Though the name of Charlemagne 
appears, the romancers are really unable to distinguish him from Charles 
Martel or from Charles the Bald (pp. 537-539). They ascribe to him an 
expedition to the Holy Land, in which he conquered Jerusalem from the 
Saracens, obtained possession of the relics of the passion of Christ, the 
crown of thorns, etc. These precious relics he carried to Rome, from 
whence they were taken to Spain by a Saracen emir, named Balan, at the 
head of an army. The expedition of Charlemagne against the Saracens in 
Spain was undertaken for the purpose of recovering the relics: “Ces 
divers romans peuvent étre regardés comme la suite, comme le développe 
ment, de la fiction de la conquéte de Jérusalem par Charlemagne.” 

Respecting the Romance of Rinaldo of Montauban (describing the strag 
gles of a feudal lord against the emperor) M. Fauriel observes, “Il n’y a je 
crois, aucun fondement historique: c’est selon toute apparence, la pure ex 
pression poétique du fait général, ’ etc. (p. 542.) - 


CHARLEMAGNE. 477 


tems which an audience of that day had neither disposition to 
undertake nor means to resolve. They accepted the narrative 
as they heard it, without suspicion or reserve; the incidents re. 
lated, as well as the connecting links between them, were in ful] 
harmony with their feelings, and gratifying as well to their 
sympathies as to their curiosity: nor was anything farther want- 
ing to induce them to believe it, though the historical basis might 
be'ever so slight or even non-existent.! 





? Among the “formules consacrées” (observes M. Fauriel) of the roman- 
cers of the Carlovingian epic, are asseverations of their own veracity, and of 
the accuracy of what they are about to relate— specification of witnesses 
whom they have consulted— appeals to pretended chronicles: “Que ces 
citations, ces indications, soient parfois sérieuses et sincéres, cela peut étre; 
mais c’est une exception et une exception rare. De telles allégations de la 
part des romanciers, sont en général un pur et simple mensonge, mais non 
toutefois un mensonge gratuit. C’est un mensonge qui a sa raison et sa 
conyenance: il tient au désir et au besoin de satisfaire une opinion accoutu- 
mée & supposer et a chercher du vrai dans les fictions du genre de celles ou 
Yon allégue ces prétendues autorités. La maniére dont les auteurs de ces 
fictions les qualifient souvent eux-mémes, est une conséquence naturelle de 
leur prétention d’y avoir suivi des documens vénérables. Ils les qualifient 
de chansons de vieille histoire, de haute histoire, de bonne geste, de grande baron- 
nie: et ce n’est pas pour se vanter qu’ils parlent ainsi: la vanité d’auteur 
n’est rien chez eux, en comparaison du besoin qu’ils ont d’étre crus, de passer 
pour de simples traducteurs, de simples répétiteurs de légendes ou histoire 
consacrée. Ces protestations de véracité, qui, plus ou moins expresses, sont 
de rigueur dans les romans Carlovingiens, y sont aussi fréquemment accom 
pagnées de protestations accessoires contre les romanciers, qui, ayant deja 
traité un sujet donné, sont accusés d’y avoir faussé la vérité.”” (Fauriel, 
Orig. d PEpopée Chevaleresque, in the Revue des Deux Mondes, vol. xiii. 
p. 554.) 

About the Cycle of the Round Table, see the same series of articles 
(Rev. D. M. t. xiv. pp. 170-184). The Chevaliers of the Saint Graal were a 
sort of idéal of the Knights Templars: “Une race de princes hérotques, 
originaires de J’Asie, fut prédestinée par le ciel méme 4 la garde du Saint 
Graal. Perille fut le premier de cette race, qui s’étant converti au Chris- 
tianisme, passa en Europe sous l’Empereur Vespasien,” etc.; then follows a 
string of fabulous incidents: the epical agency is similar to that of Homer 
— Avde 0 éredeiero Bova7. 

M. Paulin Paris, in his Prefaces to the Romans des Douze Pairs do 
France, has controverted many of the positions of M. Fauriel, and with suc- 
cess, so far as regards the Provencal origin of the Chansons de Geste, 
asserted by the latter. In regard to the Romances of the Round Table, he 


478 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


The romances of chivalry represented, to those who heard 
them, real deeds of the foretime — “ glories of the foregone men,” 
to use the Hesiodic expression! — at the same time that they em 
bodied and filled up the details of an heroic ideal, such as that 
age could conceive and admire — a fervent piety, combined with 
strength, bravery, and the love of adventurous aggression, directed 
sometimes against infidels, sometimes against enchanters or mon- 
sters, sometimes in defence of the fair sex. Such characteristics 
were naturally popular, in a century of feudal struggles and uni- 





agrees substantially with M. Fauriel; but he tries to assign a greater histo- 
rical value to the poems of the Carlovingian epic, — very: unsuccessfully, in 
my opinion. ‘ But his own analysis of the old poem of Garin Ge Loherain 
bears out the very opinion which he is confuting: “ Nous sommes au régne 
de Charles Martel, et nous reconnaissons sous d’autres noms les détails 
exacts de la fameuse défaite d’Attila dans les champs Catalauniques. Saint 
Loup et Saint Nicaise, glorieux prélats du quatriéme siécle, reviennent 
figurer autour du pére de Pépin le Bref: enfin pour compléter la confusion, 
Charles Martel meurt sur le champ de bataille, 4 la place du roi des Visi- 
goths, Théodoric...... Toutes les parties de la narration sont vraies: seule- 
ment toutes s’y trouvent déplacées. En général, les peuples n’entendent rien 4 
la chronologie : les événemens restent: les individus, les lieux et les époques, 
ne laissent aucune trace: c’est pour ainsi dire, une décoration scénique que 
Von applique indifféremment a des récits souvent contraires.” (Preface to 
the Roman de Garin le Lohcrain, pp. xvi-—xx.: Paris, 1833.) Compare also 
his Lettre ’ M. Monmerqué, prefixed to the Roman de Berthe aux Grans 
Piés, Paris, 1836. 

To say that all the parts of the narrative are true, is contrary to M. Paris's 
own showing: some parts may be true, separately taken, but these fragments 
of truth are melted down with a large mass of fiction, and cannot be dis- 
criminated unless we possess some independent test. The poet who picks 
out one incident from the fourth century, another from the fifth, and a few 
more from the eighth, and then blends them all into a continuous tale along 
with many additions of his own, shows that he takes the items of fact because 
they suit the purposes of his narrative, not because they happen to be attested 
by historical evidence. His hearers are not critical: they desire to have 
their imaginations and feelings affected, and they are content to accept with- 
out question whatever accomplishes this end. 

1 Hesiod, Theogon. 100 —xAéa xporépar dadporwv. Puttenham talks of 
the remnant of bards existing in his time (1589): “ Blind Harpers, or such 
like ‘Taverne Minstrels, whose matters are for the most part stories of old 
time, as the Tale of Sir Topaze, the Reportes of Bevis of Southampton, Adam 
Bell, Clymme of the Clough, and sach other old Romances or Historical 
Rhymes.” (Arte of English Poesic, book ii. cap. 9.) 


NIEBELUNGEN LIED.—EDDA. 479 


versal insecurity, when the grand subjects of common respect and 
interest were the Church and the Crusades, and when the latter 
especially were embraced with an enthusiasm truly astonishing. 

The long German poem of the Niebelungen Lied, as well as 
the Volsunga Saga and a portion of the songs of the Edda, relate 
to a common fund of mythical, superhuman personages, and of 
fabulous adventure, identified with the earliest antiquity of the 
Teutonic and Scandinavian race, and representing their primitive 
sentiment towards ancestors of divine origin. Sigurd, Brynhilde, 
Gudrun, and Atle, are mythical characters celebrated as well by 
the Scandinavian Scalds as by the German epic poets, but with 
many varieties and separate additions to distinguish the one from 
the other. The German epic, later and more elaborated, includes 
various persons not known to the songs in the Edda, in particu- 
lar the prominent name of Dieterich of Bern — presenting, more- 
over, the principal characters and circumstances as Christian, while 
in the Edda there is no trace of anything but heathenism. There 
is, indeed, in this the old and heathen version, a remarkable anal- 
ogy with many points of Grecian mythical narrative. As in the 
case of the short life of Achilles, and of the miserable Labdakids 
of Thébes — so in the family of the Volsungs, though sprung from 
and protected by the gods —a curse of destiny hangs upon them 
and brings on their ruin, in spite of preéminent personal quali- 
ties. The more thoroughly this old Teutonic story has been 
traced and compared, in its various transformations and accom- 
paniments, the less can any well-established connection be made 
out for it with authentic historical names or events. We must 
acquiesce in its personages as distinct in original conception from 
common humanity, and as belonging to the subjective mythical 
world of the race by whom they were sung. 

Such were the compositions which not only interested the 





? Respecting the Volsunga Saga and the Niebelungen Lied, the work of 
Lange — Untersuchungen aber die Geschichte und das Verhiltniss der 
Nordischen und Deutschen Heldensage — is a valuable translation from the 
Danish Saga-Bibliothek of P. E. Maller. 

P. E. Maller maintains, indeed, the historical basis.of the tales respecting 
the Volsungs (see pp. 102-107)— upon arguments very unsatisfactory ; 
though the genuine Scandinavian origin of the tale is perfectly made out. 
The chapter added by Lange himself, at the close (see p. 432, etc.), contains 


480 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


emotions, but also satisfied the undistinguishing historical eurio- 
sity, of the ordinary public in the middle ages. The exploits of 
many of these romantic heroes resemble in several points those 
of the Grecian; the adventures of Perseus, Achilles, Odysseus, 
Atalanta, Bellerophon, Jasén, and the Trojan war, or Argonautic 
expedition generally, would have fitted in perfectly to the Car- 
lovingian or other epics of the period.!. That of the middle ages, 





juster views as to the character of the primitive mythology, though he too 
advances some positions respecting a something “ reinsymbolisches ” in the 
background, which I find it difficult to follow (see p. 477, etc). — There are 
very ancient epical ballads still sung by the people in the Faro Islands, many 
of them relating to Sigurd and his adventures (p. 412). 

Jacob Grimm, in his Deutsche Mythologie, maintains the purely mythical 
character, as opposed to the historical, of Siegfried and Dieterich (Art. Helden, 
pp. 344-346). 

So, too, in the great Persian epic of Ferdousi, the principal characters are 
religious and mythical. M. Mohl observes, —“ Les caractéres des person- 
nages principaux de l’ancienne histoire de Perse se retrouvent dans le livre 
des Rois (de Ferdousi) tels que les indiquent les parties des livres de Zoro- 
aster que nous possédons encore. Kaioumors, Djemschid, Feridoun, Gush-— 
tasp, Isfendiar, etc. jouent dans le poeme épique le méme role que dans les 
Livres sacrées: 4 cela prés, que dans les derniers ils nous apparaissent & 
travers une atmosphere mythologique qui grandit tous leurs traits: mais 
cette différence est précisement celle qu’on devait s’attendre a trouver entre 
la tradition religieuse et la tradition épique.” (Mohl, Livre des Rois par 
Ferdousi, Préface, p. 1.) 

The Persian historians subsequent to Ferdousi have all taken his poem as 
the basis of their histories, and have even copied him faithfully and literally 
(Mohl, p. 53).. Many of his heroes became the subjects of long epical biog- 
raphies, written and recited without any art or grace, often by writers whose 
names are unknown (ib. pp. 54-70). Mr. Morier tells us that “the Shah 
Nameh is still believed by the present Persians to contain their ancient his- 
tory” (Adventures of Hadgi Baba, c. 32). As the Christian romancers 
transformed Apollo into the patron of Mussulmans, so Ferdousi makes Alex- 
ander the Great a Christian: “La critique historique (observes M. Mohl) 
était du temps de Ferdousi chose presqu’ inconnue.” (7b. p. xlviii.) About the 
absence not only of all historiography, but also of all idea of it, or taste for it 
among the early Indians, Persians, Arabians, etc., see the learned book of 
Nork, Die Gotter Syriens, Preface, p. viii. segq. (Stuttgart, 1842.) 

1 Several of the heroes of the ancient world were indeed themselves popu- 
lar subjects with the romancers of the middle ages, Théseus, Jas6n, ete. 
Alexander the Great, more so than any of them. 

Dr. Warton observes, respecting the Argonautic expedition, “ Few stories 


EXPANSIVE CHARACTER OF EPIC LEGEND. 481 


like the Grecian, was eminently expansive in its nature: new 
stories were successively attached to the names and companions 
of Charlemagne and Arthur, just as the legend of Troy was 
enlarged by Arktinus, Leschés, and Stesichorus, — that of Thébes, 
by fresh miseries entailed on the fated head of CEdipus, —and 
that of the Kalydénian boar, by the addition of Atalanta. Alto- 
gether, the state of mind of the hearers seems in both cases to 
have been much the same,—eager for emotion and sympathy, 
and receiving any narrative attuned to their feelings, not merely 
with hearty welcome, but also with unsuspecting belief. 
Nevertheless, there were distinctions deserving of notice, which 
render the foregoing proposition more absolutely exact with re- 
gard to Greece than with regard to the middle ages. The tales 
of the epic, and the mythes in their most popular and extended 
signification, were the only intellectual nourishment with which 
the Grecian public was supplied, until the sixth century before 
the Christian wra: there was no prose writing, no history, no 
philosophy. But such was not exactly the case at the time when 
the epic of the middle ages appeared. At that time, a portion of 
society possessed the Latin language, the habit of writing, and 
some tinge both of history and philosophy: there were a series 
of chronicles, scanty, indeed, and imperfect, but referring to con- 





of antiquity have more the cast of one of the old romances than this of Jason. 
An expedition of a new kind is made into a strange and distant country, 
attended with infinite dangers and difficulties. The king’s daughter of the 
new country is an enchantress; she falls in love with the young prince, who 
is the chief adventurer. ‘The prize which he seeks is guarded by brazen-foot- 
ed bulls, who breathe fire, and by a hideous dragon, who never sleeps. The 
princess lends him the assistance of her charms and incantations to conquer 
these obstacles; she gives him possession of the prize, leaves her father’s 
. court, and follows him into his native country.” (Warton, Observations sa 
Spenser, vol. i. p. 178.) 

To the same purpose M. Ginguené: “ Le premier modéle des Fées' n’est- 
il pas dans Cireé, dans Calypso, dans Médée? Celui des géans, dans Poly- 
phéme, dans Cacus, et dans les géans, ou les Titans, cette race ennemie de 
Jupiter? Les serpens et les dragons des romans ne sont-ils pas des succes- 
seurs du dragon des Hesperides et de celui de la Toison d’or? Les Magi- 
ciens! la Thessalie en étoit pleine- Les armes enchantées impénétrables ! 
elles sont de Ja méme trempe, et l’on peut les croire forgées au méme four- 
neau que celles d’Achille et d’Enée.” (Gingnené, Histoire Littéraire d’Italie, 
¢ol. iv. part ii. ch. 3, p. 151.) 

VOL. IL 21 3loc. 


482 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


temporary events and preventing the real history of tha past 
from passing into oblivion: there were even individual scholars, 
in the twelfth century, whose acquaintance with Latin literature 
was sufficiently considerable to enlarge their minds and to im- 
prove their judgments. Moreover, the epic of the middle ages, 
though deeply imbued with religious ideas, was not directly amal- 
gamated with the religion of the people, and did not always find 
favor with the clergy; while the heroes of the Grecian epic 
were not only linked in a thousand ways with existing worship, 
practices, and sacred localities, but Homer and Hesiod pass with 
Herodotus for the constructors of Grecian theology. We thus 
see that the ancient epic was both exempt from certain distract- 
ing influences by which that of the middle ages was surrounded, 
and more closely identified with the veins of thought and feeling 
prevalent in the Grecian public. Yet these counteracting in- 
fluences did not prevent Pope Calixtus I. from declaring the 
Chronicle of Turpin to be a genuine history. 

If we take the history of our own country as it was conceived 
and written from the twelfth to the seventeenth century by Hard+ 
yng, Fabyan, Grafton, Hollinshed, and others, we shall find that 
it was supposed to begin with Brute the Trojan, and was carried 
down from thence, for many ages and through a long succession 
of kings, to the times of Julius Cesar. <A similar belief of de- 
scent from Troy, arising seemingly from a reverential imitation 
of the Romans and of their Trojan origin, was cherished in the 
fancy of other European nations. With regard to the English, 
the chief circulator of it was Geoffrey of Monmouth, and it pass- 
ed with little resistance or dispute into the national faith—the 
kings from Brute downward being enrolled in regular chronolo- 
gical series with their respective dates annexed. In a dispute 


which took place during the reign of Edward I. (A. p. 1801) ~ 


between England and Scotland, the descent of the kings of Eng- 
jand from Brute the Trojan was solemnly embodied in a docu- 
ment put forth to sustain the rights of the crown of England, as 
an argument bearing on the case then in discussion: and it pass- 
ed without attack from the opposing party,! —an incident which 





* See Warton’s History of English Poetry, sect. iii. p. 131, note. “ No 
man befon) the sixteenth century presumed to doubt that the Francs derived 


a 


EARLY HISTORY OF ENGLAND. 483 


reminds as of the appeal made by Aischinés, in the contention 
between the Athenians and Philip of Macedén, respecting Am- 
phinolis, to the primitive dotal rights of Akamas son of Théseus 
—and also of the defence urged by the Athenians to sustain their 
eonquest of Sigeium, against the reclamations of the Mityleneans, 
“herein the former alleged that they had as much right to the 
rlace as any of the other Greeks who had formed part of the 
rictorious armament of Agamemnon.! 

The tenacity with which this early series of British kings was 
@efended, is no less remarkable than the facility with which it 
was admitted. The chroniclers at the beginning of the seven- 
teenth century warmly protested against the intrusive scepticism 
which would cashier so many venerable sovereigns and efface so 
many noble deeds. ‘They appealed to the patriotic feelings of 
their hearers, represented the enormity of thus setting up a pre- 
sumptuous criticism against the belief of ages, and insisted on 
the danger of the precedent as regarded history generally.2, How 
his controversy stood, at the time and in the view of the illus- 





their origin from Francus son of Hector; that the Spaniards were descend- 
ed from Japhet, the Britons from Brutus, and the Scotch from Fergus.” 
(Zbid. p. 140.) 

According to the Prologue of the prose Edda, Odin was the supreme 
king of Troy in Asia, “in eA terrad quam nos Turciam appellamus..... 
Hine omnes Borealis plagsze magnates vel primores genealogias suas refer- 
unt, atque principes illius urbis inter numina locant: sed in primis ipsum 
Priamum pro Odeno ponunt,” ete. They also identified Zros with Thor. 
(See Lexicon Mythologicum ad caleem Eddz Ssxmund, p. 552. vol. iii.) 

1 See above, ch. xv. p. 458; also Aschinés, De Falsd Legatione, c. 14, 
Herodot. v. 94. The Herakleids pretended a right to the territory in Sicily 
near Mount Eryx, in consequence of the victory gained by their progenitor 
Héraklés over Eryx, the eponymous hero of the place. (Herodot. v. 43.) 

* The remarks in Speed’s Chronicle (book v. c. 3. sect. 11-12), and the 
preface to Howes’s Continuation of Stow’s Chronicle, published in 1631, are 
curious as illustrating this earnest feeling. The Chancellor Fortescue, in 
impressing upon his royal pupil, the son of Henry VI. the limited character 
of English monarchy, deduces it from Brute the Trojan: “ Concerning the 
different powers which kings claim over their subjects, I am firmly of opin- 
ion that it arises solely from the different nature of their original institution. 
So the kingdom of England had its original from Brute and the Trojans, 
who attended him from Italy and Greece, and became a mixed kind of 
government, compounded of the regal and the political.” (Hallam, Hist 
Mid. Ages, ch. viii. P. 5, page 230.) 


484 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


trious author ef Paradise Lost, I shall give in his own words, as 
they appear in the second page of his History of England. After 
having briefly touched upon the stories of Samothes son of Ja- 
phet, Albion son of Neptune, etc., he proceeds: — — 

“ But now of Brutus and his Hing, with the whole progeny ob 
kings to the entrance of Julius Caesar, we cannot so easily be 
discharged: descents of ancestry long continued, laws and ex- 
ploits not plainly seeming to be borrowed or devised, which on 
the common belief have wrought no small impression: defended 
by many, denied utterly by few. For what though Brutus and the 
whole Trojan pretence were yielded up, seeing they, who first de- 
vised to bring us some noble ancestor, were content at first with 
Brutus the Consul, till better invention, though not willing to fore- 
go the name, taught them to remove it higher into a more fabu- 
lous age, and by the same remove lighting on the Trojan tales, 
in affectation to make the Briton of one original with the Roman, 
pitched there: Yet those old and inborn kings, never any to have 
been real persons, or done tn their lives at least some part of what 
so long hath been remembered, cannot be thought without too strict 
incredulity. For these, and those causes above mentioned, that 
which hath received approbation from so many, I have chosen 
not to omit. Certain or uncertain, be that upon the credit of those 
whom I must follow: so faras keeps aloof from impossible or 
absurd, attested by ancient writers from books more ancient, I 
refuse not, as the due and proper subject of story.”! 

Yet in spite of the general belief of so many centuries — in 
spite of the concurrent persuasion of historians and poets —in 
spite of the declaration of Milton, extorted from his feelings 
rather than from his reason, that this long line of quasi-historical 
kings and exploits could not be all unworthy of belief — in spite 
of so large a body of authority and precedent, the historians of 
the nineteenth century begin the history of England with Julius 
Cwsar. They do not attempt either to settle the date of king 
Bladud’s accession, or to determine what may be the basis of 
truth in the affecting narrative of Lear.2 The standard of his 





*“ Antiquitas enim recepit fabulas fictas etiam nonnunquam incondite: 
hee wetas autem jam exculta, presertim eludens omne quod fieri non potest, 
respuit,” ete. (Cicero, De Republica, ii. 10, p. 147, ed. Maii.) 

* Dr. Zachary Grey has the following observations in his Notes on Shaks 


HISTORICAL STANDARD OF CREDIBILITY. 485 


torical credibility, especially with regard to modern events, has 
indeed been greatly and sensibly raised within the last hundred 
years. 

But in regard to ancient Grecian history, the rules of evidence 
still continue relaxed. The dictum of Milton, regarding the ante- 
Czsarian history of England, still represents pretty exactly the 
feeling now prevalent respecting the mythical history of Greece 
“Yetthose old and inborn kings (Agamemnén, Achilles, Odys- 
seus, Jason, Adrastus, Amphiaraus, Meleager, etc.), never any 
to have been real persons, or done in their lives at least some 
part of what so long hath been remembered, cannot be thought 
without too strict incredulity.”. Amidst much fiction (we are still 
told), there must be some truth: but how is such truth to be 
singled out? Milton does not even attempt to make the seve- 
rance: he contents himself with “ keeping aloof from the impos- 
sible and the absurd,” and ends in a narrative which has indeed 
the merit of being sober-colored, but which he never for amoment 
thinks of recommending to his readers as true. So in regard to 
the legends of Greece, — Troy, Thébes, the Argonauts, the Boar 
of Kalydon, Heéraklés, Théseus, CEdipus,— the conviction still 
holds in men’s minds, that there must be something true at the 
bottom; and many readers of this work may be displeased, I 
fear, not to see conjured up before them the Eidélon of an au- 
thentic history, even though the vital spark of evidence be 
altogether wanting.! 
peare (London, 1754, vol. i. p. 112). In commenting on the passage in King 
Lear, Nero is an angler in the lake of darkness, he says, “This is one of 
Shakspeare’s most remarkable anachronisms. King Lear succeeded his 
father Bladud anno mundi 3105; and Nero, anno mundi 4017, was sixteen 
years old, when he married Octavia, Cesar’s daughter. See Funcii Chro- 
nologia, p. 94.” 

Such a supposed chronological discrepancy would hardly be pointed out 
in any commentary now written. 

The introduction prefixed by Mr. Giles, to his recent translation of Geof- 
frey of Monmouth (1842), gives a just view both of the use which our old 
poets made of his tales, and of the general credence so long and so unsus- 
pectingly accorded to them. The list of old British kings given by Mr. 
Giles also deserves attention, as a el to the Grecian genealogies anterior 
to the Olympiads. 

3 The following passage, from the Preface of Mr. Price to Warton’s His- 
ery of English Poetry, is alike just and forcibly ctaracterized; the whole 





s 


486 HISTORY OF GREECE. 


I presume to think that our great poet has proceeded upon 
mistaken views with respect to the old British fables, not less in 





Preface is, indeed, full of philosophical reflection on popular fables gene- 
rally. Mr. Price observes (p. 79) :— 

“The great evil with which this long-contested question appears to be 
threatened at the present day, is an extreme equally dangerous with the 
incredulity of Mr. Ritson, —a disposition to receive as authentic history, 
under a slightly fabulous coloring, every incident recorded in the British 
Chronicle. An allegorical interpretation is now inflicted upon all the mar- 
vellous circumstances ; a forced construction imposed upon the less glaring 
deviations from probability; and the usual subterfuge of baffled research, — 
erroneous readings and etymological sophistry, —is made to reduce every 
stubborn and intractable text to something like the consistency required. It 
might have been expected that the notorious failures of Dionysius and Plu- 
tarch, in Roman history, would have prevented the repetition of an error, 
which neither learning nor ingenuity can render palatable; and that the 
havoc and deadly ruin effected by these ancient writers (in other respects so 
valuable) in one of the most beautiful and interesting monuments of tradi- 
tional story, would have acted as sufficient corrective on all future aspirants. 
The favorers of this system might at least have been instructed by the phi- 
losophic example of Livy, —if it be lawful to ascribe to philosophy a line 
of conduct which perhaps was prompted by a powerful sense of poetic 
beauty, — that traditional record can only gain in the hands of the future 
historian by one attractive aid, —the grandeur and lofty graces of that in- 
comparable style in which the first decade is written ; and that the best duty 
towards antiquity, and the most agreeable one towards posterity, is to trans- 
mit the narrative received as an unsophisticated tradition, in all the plenitude 
of its marvels and the awful dignity of its supernatural agency. For, how- 
ever largely we may concede that real events have supplied the substance of 
any traditive story, yet the amount of absolute facts, and the manner of those 
facts, the period of their occurrence, the names of the agents, and the local- 
ity given to the scene, are all. combined upon principles so wholly beyond 
our knowledge, that it becomes impossible to fix with certainty upon any 
single point better authenticated than its fellow. Probability in such decis- 
ions will often prove the most fallacious guide we can follow; for, independ- 
ently of the acknowledged historical axiom, that ‘le vrai n’est pas toujours 
le vraisemblable,’ innumerable instances might be adduced, where tradition 


has had recourse to this very probability to confer a plausible sanction upon 


her most fictitious and romantic incidents. It will be a much more useful 
labor, wherever it can be effected, to trace the progress of this traditional 
story in the country where it has become located, by a reference to those 
natural or artificial monuments which are the unvarying sources of fictitious 
events; and, by a strict comparison of its details with the analogous memo- 
rials of other nations, to separate those elements which are obviously of # 
native growth, from the occurrences bearing the impress of a foreign origin 


a 


SUBJECTIVE VIEW OF THE MYTHES. 487 


that which he leaves out than in that which he retains. To omit 
the miraculous and the fantastic, (it is that which he really means 
by “the impossible and the absurd,”) is to suck the lifeblood out 
of these once popular narratives, — to divest them at once both 
of their genuine distinguishing mark, and the charm by which 
they acted on the feelings of believers. Still less ought we to 
consent to break up and disenchant in a similar manner the mythes 
of ancient Greece, — partly because they possess the mythical 
beauties and characteristics in far higher perfection, partly be- 
cause they sank deeper into the mind of a Greek, and pervaded 
both the public and private sentiment of the country to a much 
greater degree than the British fables in England. 

Two courses, and two only, are open; either to pass over the 
mythes altogether, which is the way in which modern historians 
treat the old British fables, or else ‘to give an account of them 
as mythes; to recognize and respect their specific nature, and to 
abstain from confounding them with ordinary and certifiable his- 
tory. There are good reasons for pursuing this second method 
in reference to the Grecian mythes; and when so considered, 
they constitute an important chapter in the history of the Grecian 
mind, and indeed in that of the human race generally. The his- 
torical faith of the Greeks, as well as that of other people, in 
reference to early and unrecorded times, is as much subjective 
and peculiar to themselves as their religious faith: among the 
Greeks, especially, the two are confounded with an intimacy 
which nothing less than great violence can disjoin. Gods, heroes, 
and men — religion and patriotism — matters divine, heroic, and 
human — were all woven together by the Greeks into one indi- 
visible web, in which the threads of truth and reality, whatever 
they might originally have been, were neither intended to be, 





We shall gain litile, perhaps, by such a course for the history of human events ; 
but it will be an important accession to our stock of knowledge on the his- 
tory of the human mind. It will infallibly display, as in the analysis of every 
sitnilar record, the operations of that refining principle which is ever obliter- 
ating the monotonous deeds of violence that fill the chronicle of a nation’s 
early career, and exhibit the brightest attribute in the catalogue of man’s 
intellectual endowments, —a glowing and vigorous imagination, — bestowing 
upon all the impulses of the mind a splendor and virtuous dignity, which, 
however fallacious historically considered, are never without a powerfully 
tedeeming good, the ethical tendency of all thei: lessons” 


% 


488 : HISTORY OF GREECE. 


nor were actually, distinguishable. Composed of such materials, 
and animated by the electric spark of genius, the mythical an- 
tiquities of Greece formed a whole at once trustworthy and 
captivating to the faith and feelings of the people; but neither 
trustworthy nor captivating, when we sever it from these sub. 
jective conditions, and expose its naked elements to the scrutiny 
of an objective criticism. Moreover, the separate portions of 
Grecian mythical foretime ought to be considered with reference 
to that aggregate of which they form a part: to detach the divine 
from the heroic legends, or some one of the heroic legends from 
the remainder, as if there were an essential and generic difference 
between them, is to present the whole under an erroneous point 
of view. The mythes of Troy and Thébes are no more to be 
handled objectively, with a view to detect an historical base, then 
those of Zeus in Kréte, of Apollo and Artemis in Délos, of 
Hermés, or of Prométheus. To single out the Siege of Troy 
from the other mythes, as if it were entitled to preéminence as 
an ascertained historical and chronological event, is a proceeding 
which destroys the true character and coherence of the mythical 
world: we only transfer the story (as has been remarked in the 
preceding chapter) from a class with which it is connected by 
every tie both of common origin and fraternal affinity, to another 
with which it has no relationship, except such as violent and 
gratuitous criticism may enforce. 

By drawing this marked distinction between the mythical and 
the historical world, — between matter appropriate only for sub- 
jective history, and matter in which objective evidence is attain- 
able, — we shall only carry out to its proper length the just and 
well-known position long ago laid down by Varro. That learned 
man recognized three distinguishable periods in the time pre- 
ceding his own age; “First, the time from the beginning of 
mankind down to the first deluge; a time wholly unknown. Sec- 
ondly, the period from the first deluge down to the first Olympiad, 
which is called the mythical period, because many fabulous things 
are recounted in it. Thirdly, the time from the first Olympiad 
down to ourselves, which is called the historical period, because 
the things done in it are comprised in true histories.”! 





- Varro ap. Censorir. de Die Natali; Varronis Fragm. p. 219, ed. Scali- 
ger, 1623. “ Varro tria discrimina temporum esse tradit. Primum ab hon 


PAR‘CITION OF PAST TIME BY VAERRO. »489 
> 


Taking the commencement of true or objective history at the 
point indicated by Varro, I still consider the mythical and histor. 
ical periods to be separated by a wider gap than he would have 
admitted. To select any one year as an absolute point of com- 
mencement, is of course not to be understood literally: but in 
point of fact, this is of very little importance in reference to the 
present question, seeing that the great mythical events — the 
sieges of Thébes and Troy, the Argonautic expedition, the Kaly- 
donian boar-hunt, the Return of the Hérakleids, etc.—are all 
placed long anterior to the first Olympiad, by those who have 
applied chronological boundaries to the mythical narratives. The 
period immediately preceding the first Olympiad is one exceed- 
ingly barren of events; the received chronology recognizes four 
hundred years, and Herodotus admitted five hundred years, from 
that date back to the Trojan war. 





inum principio usque ad cataclysmum priorem, quod propter ignorantiam 
vocatur ddjAov. Secundum, a cataclysmo priore ad Olympiadem primam, 
quod quia in eo multa fabulosa referuntur, Mythicon nominatur. Tertium 
a prima Olympiade ad nos; qued dicitur Historicon, quia res in eo gests 
veris histeriis continentur.” 

To the same purpose Africanus, ap. Eusebium, Prep. Ev. xx. p. 487: 
Méxpe piv ’OAvuriadwr, obdév axpiBic icropntat Toig “EAAnal, navTwv avyKe- 
yupéver, kai kata undiv aitoic rau mpd Tod cuppwroivrur, etc. 








pT Sat Th 























cae | 5 a 
; y : vs 
uf Ser os Fl ff SOAP 
‘ 
. etsy yt 
forvo a5) Ee 
“¥ S hawt ‘ , 
' Si POPE 2 
& eae ek Mt 
‘ , te ¥ 
\ a? bs 7 Ch ath 
“? ; f 
poey : : ; 
oe ‘ CL yiRe b eats Miya & 
Aad St sat ri} Sats 
; \ 
. ’ : t ¢ 
YR LETRAS i ‘Tih ee) 
’ re 
> ” ~ uM See A 
Se 
. * 
qy 
~ = E 
a2 "A - ; 
} ef ‘ 
: i 2 ¥ ie 
“s i ft 
» | et tet wh 
7 , 
Ps . ‘ai ‘ s 
? ‘ 
2 sv ) 
z 
7 















Te VIE Ta! 


f, 
fe 
4 


OSes 


ryt, 





P Peon “inte aoa ii 
AF ft a. 





Lt ow ime 
Ay Bie tay Mild 
ARS 
r vu 
D me =* « Va ~~ 

















us 


ar een, 























oe 







































































































































































